! 





LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 


Chap. 

Shelf 




UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 

9—178 



fy 



SPEECHES 



ON SOME CURRENT 



POLITICAL QUESTIONS. 



Camferfoge : 



PRINTED BY 0. J. CLAY, M.A. 
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 



SPEECHES 



ON SOME CUKEENT 



POLITICAL QUESTIONS 



HENRY FAWCETT, M.P. 

II 
FELLOW OF TBINITY HALL ; AND PEOFESSOE OF POLITICAL ECONOMY IN THE 
UNIVEESITY OF CAMBEIDGE. 



Hontrott : 

MACMILLAN AND CO. 

1873. 

I 

[All Rights reserved. .] 



** 






24504 



O 




.W waSVW^ 



PREFACE. 



I pbobably should not have thought of publishing the 
present volume had it not happened that in the past 
session the discussion on the Indian Budget did not 
commence until so late an hour in the evening as to 
render it impossible for the debate to be adequately 
reported. Many friends consequently asked me to 
publish the speech which I made in that debate. After 
I had consented to do so, I thought it might not be 
inappropriate to publish some other speeches which 
I had made on questions which still await settlement. 
It may be thought that as the present volume contains 
three speeches on the Irish University question, that I 
have not confined it simply to political subjects which 
still remain unsettled. I have however endeavoured to 
shew that much remains to be done in reference to 
University Education in Ireland ; and it certainly ap- 
peared to me that a short retrospect of the history of 
the question might not be wanting in interest to those 
who will have to determine the future of higher educa- 



vi PREFACE. 

tion in Ireland. All the speeches except the last were 
made in the House of Commons. My chief reason for 
pubhshing the one delivered at an annual meeting of 
the Brighton constituency is, that it refers to many 
topics of present interest, and especially to the active 
agitation now being revived in favour of the repeal of 
the income-tax. It also contains some remarks on the 
relations between a member and his constituents in 
reference .to the mode of conducting an election. 

For the sake of brevity, when I have had occasion 
to refer several times to the same member, I have 
mentioned his name, instead of adopting the House of 
Commons method of describing him as "my honourable 
friend the member for such a place." 



Cambridge, 

Oct. 1873. 



CONTENTS. 



PAGE 

1. Indian Finance, the Indian Budget, 1872 ... 1 

2. „ „ „ „ 1873 ... 47 

3. The Birmingham League and the Education Act, 1873 107 

4. The Nine Hours Bill, 1873 122 

5. Election Expenses, 1873 . . i . . .145 

6. Women's Suffrage, 1873 ...... 159 

7. Household Suffrage in Counties and the Redistribution 

of Seats, 1873 . 172 

8. Irish University Education : Ministerial Crisis, 1872 185 

9. ,, ,, „ The Government Bill, 

1873 ... 196 

10. „ „ „ The Dublin University- 

Tests Bill, 1873 , . 217 

11. The Enclosure of Commons, 1871 . . . .224 

12. The Law Officers of the Crown, 1872 . . . 239 

13. Speech at Brighton, 1873 253 



INDIAN FINANCE. 



INDIAN BUDGET 1 , August 6, 1872. 

I rise, I need scarcely say, with some little perturba- 
tion. Mr Grant Duff is a prophet. He says that nothing 
I can possibly say on the present occasion will be of the 
slightest consequence or importance. But, Mr Speaker, 
as I believe I am responsible for keeping you in the 
chair, I think it is alike due to you and to the House, 
that I should at the outset say a few words in justifica- 
tion of the course which I am about to pursue ; perhaps, 

1 On the introduction of the Indian Budgety 1872, Mr Fawcett moved 
the following resolution as an amendment to the motion made by Mr Grant 
Duff, that the Speaker leave the chair, in order that the House may con- 
sider the Indian Financial statement: "That this House, considering the 
statement of the late Lord Mayo that 'a feeling of discontent and dis- 
satisfaction exists among every class, both European and native, in our 
Indian Empire, on account of the increase of taxation which has for years 
been going on/ and that the 'continuance of that feeling is a political 
danger the magnitude of which can hardly be over-estimated,' is of opinion 
that the income-tax, which is generally admitted to be unsuited to the 
people of India, might, during the coming financial year, be dispensed with, 
and that other taxes exceptionally burdensome to the people of India 
might be considerably reduced, if the finances of that country were ad- 
ministered with adequate care and economy." 

*/ F.S. 1 



2 INDIAN FINANCE. 

it is the more desirable that I should do so, because 
I fear it will be necessary for me to trespass somewhat 
on the time of the House. I gave notice of this 
resolution in order to do what I could, as an independ- 
ent member, to prevent the discussion upon the Indian 
Budget from becoming a perfect farce. If I required 
any justification for the course of conduct I have pur- 
sued, should I not find it in the lateness of the period 
at which the Indian Budget is brought forward this 
Session ? No one who has the smallest acquaintance 
with the feelings of the people of India can doubt that 
the shelving of the Indian Budget to the fag end of 
the Session, will be interpreted by them as a deter- 
mination, on the part of the Government, to treat 
their affairs with neglect. The Prime Minister was 
pressed, the other night, to give a somewhat earlier 
day for the consideration of the Indian Budget — and 
what did he say? He told the House that it must 
be taken after all the essential business of the Session 
had been disposed of. 

Mr Gladstone : I beg your pardon. That was not 
my expression. What I said was business essential 
to the winding-up of the Session, having reference to 
the Bills which were to be passed and the Appropria- 
tion Act. 

Mr Fawcett : I gladly accept the explanation of 
the Prime Minister, because I shall be able to shew, 
if there is any truth in the statements I am about 
to make, that there are questions connected with In- 
dian Finance which are not only essential to the wind- 
ing-up of the business of the House, but that there 
are considerations associated with them which are 



INDIAN FINANCE. 3 

essential to the welfare of the Empire. I know very 
well what will be the excuse of the Government* 
They will put forward the ordinary plea of want of 
time. Want of time ! If this is to be their excuse^ 
they must be reminded of the evenings they frittered 
away on the Parks Bill, a measure which, according 
to their own confession, left the question more com- 
plicated than it was before. Want of time ! If this 
is to be their plea, I will ask the House to remember 
that more consideration was given, when the Ballot 
Bill was in committee, to a series of contradictory 
proposals about illiterate voters than is allotted to the 
affairs of India in an entire Session. If it is urged 
that an earlier day could not be found for the Indian 
Budget, the country must be told that the Govern- 
ment found, not a morning sitting on the 6th August, 
but a whole evening at the beginning of July, when 
they wanted to obtain money for Ex-Governor Eyre. 
With some confidence I say that I shall be able to 
bring forward facts which will shew that the finances 
of India are in such a condition, and that our position 
in that country is so intimately bound up with finance, 
that unless the House of Commons is prepared to 
ignore all responsibility in the Government of India, 
we had better allow any question to be regard- 
ed as one of secondary importance, rather than per- 
mit her affairs to be treated with neglect. But it 
will, perhaps, be said, Why did you not bring forward 
this motion earlier? If I had known what the Go- 
vernment was going to do I would have done so. It 
will probably be objected that the course I am now 
pursuing is unusual ; but the Government has adopted 

1—2 



4 INDIAN FINANCE. 

an unusual proceeding in fixing the Indian Budget 
when it cannot be properly discussed, and an unusual 
proceeding on the part of the Government requires to 
be met with an unusual course of conduct on the part 
of private members. But the great point which the 
Under Secretary has urged against me is that I am 
a member of the Indian Finance Committee, and that 
this Committee has reported its evidence without any 
expression of opinion. This I fully admit 1 ; but the 
evidence taken by the Committee is before this House. 
It will be criticised and commented upon by the press 
and by the public, and is silence to be enforced upon 
those alone who happen to be members of the Com- 
mittee ? If this is to be the case, I can only say 
that certain financial questions in India so urgently 
demand immediate consideration, and that the slight- 
est delay will be fraught with so much peril, that 
I should consider it to be my duty not to continue 
a member of the Committee one hour longer if silence 
is to be enforced. Considering the present position of 

1 It must be remembered that the chief reason why the Committee has 
not been able to complete its labours is, that the officials of the Indian 
Government have not been able to furnish the accounts which the Commit- 
tee require in reference to military expenditure and local taxation in India. 
The Times of August 7th, in a leading article on the debate on the Indian 
Budget, referring to the fact that the Committee had decided simply to 
report the evidence without expressing an opinion on it, says : — " Mr Grant 
Duff quoted this conclusion with great complacency at the close of his 
speech, as a refutation in advance of what Mr Fawcett was about to say, 
and as a justification of what he had himself said ; but those who have fol- 
lowed in any degree the proceedings of the Select Committee know that the 
judgment was a severe reflection on the ignorauce of India at the India 
Office. The Committee declared that no just opinion could be formed on 
Indian Finance, because necessary explanation on many obscure points 
could not be furnished by the India Office, and had not been obtained from 
India, though in some cases twelve months had elapsed since information 
had been applied for." 



INDIAN FINANCE. 5 

home politics, it is more than probable that the Com- 
mittee will not finish its labours while this Parliament 
lasts. It is just possible that some of us may not find 
our way back to this House ; and for one I am anxious 
that what I have to say on India should be first said 
in Parliament rather than on the platform. The evi- 
dence which is already before the House, and various 
official documents, contain certain facts with regard to 
Indian Finance. It cannot be inappropriate to com- 
ment on these facts : it will be the duty of the Com- 
mittee, when their inquiry is completed, to decide who 
is responsible for certain things which have been done, 
and to apportion personal blame, if blame is due. I 
shall carefully abstain from doing this. I shall enter 
into no personal questions. My sole object is to direct 
the attention of Parliament to the present financial 
condition of India, and to ask the House to express 
its opinion upon the continuance of a financial policy 
which the highest authorities say has already produced 
great mischief, and is fraught with the most serious 
peril in the future. The Under Secretary more than 
once stated that figures provide an infallible test. His 
speech, however, affords abundant evidence that there 
is no more fruitful source of fallacy and error than 
figures. What, for instance, has he said ? He quotes 
the revenue and expenditure since 1861, and, having 
shewn that the expenditure during that period exceeds 
the revenue by £7,500,000, he then tries to persuade 
the House that, by this outlay of £7,500,000, India 
has obtained the advantage of £37,500,000 expended 
on public works. Was there ever a more extraor- 
dinary or glaring fallacy ? Why, if such a conclusion 



6 INDIAN FINANCE. 

were to be accepted, he lias done something more than 
discover the philosopher's stone ; he has created wealth 
ont of nothing. It must, of course, be obvious to every 
one that these public works have not simply been 
constructed by this £7,500,000 of excess of expendi- 
ture over revenue. The remaining £30,000,000 have, 
of course, been provided by that increase of taxation 
which we know has taken place in India during the 
last eleven years, and which, upon the authority of 
the late Lord Mayo, has produced a feeling of discon- 
tent among all classes, both European and native. 
The Under Secretary seems to think that I have no 
right to quote Lord Mayo, because the opinion to 
which I refer was expressed by him in the autumn 
of 1870, when the income-tax was higher than it is 
now. It must, however, be remembered that Lord 
Mayo was not referring to the income-tax only, but 
to a general increase of taxation ; and, before I have 
concluded, I shall shew that he could not see less 
reason for alarm now than he did in 1870, when it is 
remembered with how many new local imposts the 
people of India are being constantly either burdened 
or threatened. But, leaving for the present the speech 
of the Under Secretary, I will proceed, as clearly and 
succinctly as I can, to give the House an account 
of the present financial condition of India. The most 
important and the most characteristic circumstance 
with regard to the finances of India is that her revenue 
is, to a great extent, inelastic, and that nearly the 
whole of her expenditure is elastic in a high degree — 
or, in other words, that the greater portion of the 
revenue is fixed in pecuniary amount; whereas two 



INDIAN FINANCE. 7 

powerful causes, viz. a general increase in the expenses 
of administration, and a general rise in prices, partly- 
owing to the depreciation in the value of the precious 
metals, are constantly causing the pecuniary- amount 
of her expenditure to increase. As this circumstance 
is one of cardinal importance with regard to the finan- 
cial prospects of India, I will explain it in greater 
detail. The most important item in the revenue of 
India is admitted to be that which is yielded by the 
land. Its gross amount is about £21,000,000; its net 
amount, £18,000,000. At least one-fifth of this reve- 
nue — namely, that yielded by the permanently settled 
districts — is fixed for ever in pecuniary amount. 
Throughout the greater part of the rest of India, 
except Madras, the land is settled for thirty years — 
or, in other words, let at a fixed rent for this period. 
All the land which is thus settled is manifestly only 
* capable of a small increase of rent, which will arise 
as the estates gradually drop in and have to be re- 
settled. The number of estates which will thus fall 
in will be comparatively small during the next few 
years. A high authority, Sir George Campbell, the 
present Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, has said, that 
the addition to the revenue which may thus accrue 
will be nearly counterbalanced by a reduction in re- 
venue which will take place in Madras when it is 
resettled, for the land there is let direct to the ryots, 
and it is supposed that their assessment is too high. 
It is therefore obvious that the land revenue is for a 
considerable period inelastic, and will not increase 
as prices advance. The next important item of 
revenue is salt, which yields £6,000,000. Every 



8 INDIAN FINANCE. 

competent authority says the duty cannot be in- 
creased. Of course, if the population increases, more 
salt may be consumed; but at the present time 
the duty is the highest that has ever been imposed 
upon a prime necessity of life. The duty varies between 
500 and 2,500 per cent, upon the* cost of the article. 
The revenue from opium varies between £6,000,000 
and £8,000,000. The Government virtually trades in 
this article, and obtains the highest price for it, just 
in the same way as any merchant does for the goods 
he has to sell. Anyone who has read the evidence of 
Sir Rutherford Alcock, our late Minister in China, 
must come to the conclusion that no revenue can be 
more precarious, that it is far more likely to decrease 
than increase, and that it may not improbably almost 
entirely vanish. Although it is my object now to 
consider our trading in opium, not as a moral, but 
purely as a financial question, yet certain opinions which*. 
I am about to quote from Sir R. Alcock, should, I 
think, warn us that it is just possible that some people, 
looking upon our proceedings from a distance, may 
accuse us of a slight amount of hypocrisy ; we do all 
in our power to force a deleterious drug upon the 
Chinese ; in our anxiety to obtain profit from opium 
we incur a constant risk of breaking off friendly re- 
lations with the Government of China ; and at the 
very time we are doing all this, we make beautiful 
moral speeches and take infinite credit to ourselves 
for restricting the sale of intoxicating liquors among 
our own people. Sir R. Alcock sums up his general ex- 
perience thus : That a strong adverse feeling exists 
in China in consequence of our growth of opium. He 



INDIAN FINANCE. 9 

says its growth in China is largely and rapidly in- 
creasing. The Chinese seriously contemplate prohibit- 
ing the importation of the drug, and allowing it to be 
grown in their own country. They think, having once 
stopped the importation, they will afterwards be able 
to stop its growth. One thing seems certain : that if 
we import into China without restriction, she will grow 
without restriction. The Chinese tax the growth of 
opium at the present time, partly by a licence-tax, or 
permission to grow. The tax is nearly 100 per cent. 
If they reduced this tax they would, of course, greatly 
encourage domestic growth. He says if he could have 
made any concessions about restricting the importation 
of opium he might have got almost what terms he 
liked in the treaty he negociated so far as admitting 
English commodities. It is scarcely necessary to say 
anything more to prove that, so far from any confidence 
being placed in opium to meet a future increase in 
expenditure, a prudent financier would regard it as 
one of the most uncertain of all revenues. India 
obtains about £2,250,000 from excise on spirits and 
drugs, and £2,750,000 from Customs. Little addition 
can be obtained from either of these sources of revenue. 
The articles subject to excise are only consumed by a 
limited class, and if Customs duties were considerably 
increased, foreign importations would be so much 
checked that little additional revenue would be yielded. 
About £750,000 is yielded by stamps. These duties 
have lately been considerably raised, and cannot be 
further increased. About £750,000 is also yielded by 
tributes. These are, of course, fixed in pecuniary 
amount. Having now mentioned the net value of 



10 INDIAN FINANCE. 

all the important items of revenue 1 , I am sure it 
must be obvious to the House that the revenue is 
eminently inelastic, and that by far the larger portion 
of it will not increase with the general rise in prices. 
It. cannot be too carefully borne in mind that the 
English revenue is elastic in an eminent degree, be-, 
cause many articles we can tax are of universal con- 
sumption, such as tea, sugar, and beer; whereas the 
great mass of the Indian people are so poor that it is 
almost impossible, except by the salt duty, to levy any 
tax on an article of general consumption. Eemember- 
ing this inelasticity of Indian revenue, we will now 
turn to expenditure, and when we find that this is 
as much characterised by elasticity as the revenue is 
by its inelasticity, we shall at once obtain a clue to 
many of the financial difficulties which press so heavily 
on India, and we shall be able at once to understand 
the increasing difficulty of making both ends meet in 
that country. It is scarcely necessary to say that the 
Army is the great item of expenditure. India, with 
a much smaller revenue than we have, has an Army 

1 The items of revenue which have here been given would make the 
revenue appear much smaller than it is usually represented to be. When, 
however, it is stated that the revenue during the past year exceeds 
.£50,000,000, it must be remembered that this revenue is made up to this 
figure by including many items which represent no revenue at all. In the 
statement of the accounts, all the sums which are expended in any depart- 
ment are included in expenditure, and the receipts are included in revenue. 
It often happens that the expenditure exceeds the revenue. Thus, there 
appears to be considerable revenue from telegraphs, but as the expenditure 
on telegraphs greatly exceeds the receipts, confusion only is created by 
including such an item in a statement of revenue. In other departments, 
such, for instance, as the forests, although there has been a large nominal 
increase of revenue during the last few years, the expenditure has grown 
still faster than the revenue, and thus the revenue from this source, although 
it has apparently increased, has really diminished. 



INDIAN FINANCE. 11 

which is more costly than ours. Its nominal expense 
is about £16,000,000, but when many charges are 
added which really belong to the Army, such as eccle- 
siastical and medical establishments, interest of money 
spent on barracks and upon railways, which are made 
for strategical rather than for commercial purposes, the 
cost of the Army is little short of £18,000,000. The 
Army, therefore, absorbs nearly the whole net revenue 
yielded by the land. The serious reflections which are 
suggested by such a fact as this should be taken to 
heart by our statesmen. But the point on which I 
wish to insist is this — that the cost of the Army in 
proportion to the number of men under arms has in- 
creased, and is likely to increase in future. There are 
two very obvious reasons for this ; first, war equipments 
are becoming more elaborate, complicated, and costly ; 
2dly, the general rise in prices, which is likely to continue 
for a long time, must affect almost every item of Army 
expenditure. This statement can, however, at once be 
corroborated by specific facts. Between 1863 and 1870 
the Indian Army was reduced by 13,000 Europeans and 
4,000 natives, i. e. about 20 per cent, of Europeans; 
and expenditure has increased from £14,800,000 to 
£16,000,000. But this elasticity of expenditure in 
India is still more strikingly shewn when we examine 
the various items of civil administration. Mr Harrison, 
the Comptroller of Accounts at Calcutta, was examined 
for several days on these, and at last we found that 
it was a repetition of a twice-told tale. Certain items 
of expenditure in 1856 — so many thousand pounds; 
in 1871 — the same items increased by 70 or 80 per 
cent. If the charge be one connected with the Pre- 



12 INDIAN FINANCE. 

sidency of Bombay, the increase would usually be yet 
greater. The following may serve as examples : — 

Cost of Printing in 1856 ,£90,500 

„ „ 1870 233,000 

Bombay Establishment, 1856 208,000 

„ „ 1870 365,000 

Household Charges of Governor of Bombay, 1856 ... 7,000 

„ „ „ 1870 ... 21,000 

Secretariat of Public Works Department, 1856 14,000 

„ „ „ 1871 31,000 

Medical Charges, 1856 157,000 

„ „ 1870 523,000 

And similar instances might be indefinitely repeated. 
But in order completely to corroborate all that I have 
stated with regard to the inelasticity of the revenue, 
and the elasticity of the expenditure, I will direct the 
particular attention of the House to some most signifi- 
cant words of the late Indian Finance Minister. Mr 
Massey insisted on the necessity of a rigid economy 
because of the inexpansiveness of the revenue. He 
said : " The truth is that your resources are so limited 
that if you should outrun the constable a little, you are 
at once landed in a deficit. You cannot expand any of 
your taxation ; you cannot create new taxation, with 
the exception of the income-tax. I wish to say that 
in round terms there is no new source of taxation, 
so far as I am aware, that it is possible for you to 
invent." If we look into the causes that have produced 
this general rise of prices, which has done so much 
prejudicially to affect the balance of revenue and expen- 
diture in the past, we shall be able to obtain important 
evidence as to the probability of a continuance of this 
rise in prices, and whether it is likely to produce similar 
consequences in the future. It is impossible to deny 



INDIAN FINANCE. 1 3 

the remarkable rise in prices that has taken place in 
the last twenty years. Sir .Bartle Frere, Sir Robert 
Montgomery, Mr Harrison, and others, admit that it 
amounts to 40 or 50 per cent., and they also acknow- 
ledge that it must necessarily increase the expenses of 
government. Any one who examines into the statistics 
of Indian trade will at once discover the cause to which 
the rise is chiefly due. During the last eleven years 
the exports from India have amounted to £541,000,000, 
and the imports to only £311,000,000, leaving the 
enormous balance of £230,000,000 due to the country. 
This has been partly liquidated by an excess of import 
of treasure over export amounting to £172,500,000; 
the remaining 60,000,000 may probably be taken as 
some measure of the sum which India has to pay Eng- 
land for the expenses of the Home Government, for 
pensions, salaries, and other sources of income to resi- 
dents in England drawn from Indian revenues. Of the 
£172,500,000 of specie which has been poured into 
India during the last eleven years, a considerable pro- 
portion has of course been added to her circulation. 
This has naturally produced a rise in prices, and a 
similar effect has followed the increase of the paper 
currency consequent on its being made a legal tender. 
From the peculiar nature of Indian trade it seems 
almost certain that this importation of specie will con- 
tinue. This rise in prices will be assisted by the gene- 
ral rise in prices that is taking place throughout the 
world, which is due to a depreciation in the value of 
the precious metals, a fact now admitted by almost 
every financier and economist of eminence. But assum- 
ing this rise of prices, we are at once met with this 



14 INDIAN FINANCE. 

most significant fact, that even if the scale on which 
expenditure is carried on be the same as at present, we 
must be prepared for increasing difficulty in making 
both ends meet ; because, as has been shewn, expendi- 
ture in India is far more affected by a rise in prices 
than its revenue ; or, in other words, it cannot be dis- 
puted, as the figures quoted sufficiently shew, that an 
increase of prices exerts a much smaller influence in 
augmenting the various items of which revenue is com- 
posed than it does in increasing the various items 
which compose expenditure. During the last eleven 
years there have been repeated deficits. In other years 
there has been the greatest difficulty in making both 
ends meet; when there has been a surplus, this surplus 
— and it is a point to which I shall most earnestly direct 
the attention of the House — has sometimes been ob- 
tained by devoting capital to income, and is therefore 
purely fictitious. Alarming as is this financial retro- 
spect, these deficits have taken place in spite of a con- 
stant increase of taxation, with all the discontent which 
we are so authoritatively told has resulted. But if 
increase of taxation has already produced so much 
mischief, what is the outlook for the future ? A 
slowly increasing revenue, a rapidly increasing expendi- 
ture, administration each year becoming more costly, 
a determination to embark on a vast and indefinite 
expenditure on public works, with the ominous fact 
constantly staring us in the face that, to use Mr 
Massey's words, "we have used up every source of 
revenue, and forced up every tax to a maximum." 
Unless we are prepared to enter upon a course of 
wanton recklessness, which will lead to financial ruin, 



INDIAN FINANCE. 15 

should not the considerations which have been just 
mentioned arouse the attention and excite the mis- 
givings of every one who feels the slightest concern for 
the future of our great dependency ? But it may be 
said, "You have attributed a considerable portion of 
the difficulty of making both ends meet in India to an 
increase in the costliness of administration and to a 
general rise in prices. These are natural causes, which 
are beyond the control of Government, and for them 
the Government is neither responsible nor deserves 
censure." My object is not, as I have said, to appor- 
tion censure; I have a far more practical object in view, 
and that is to point out, and, if possible, to avert, the 
ominous danger which threatens us in the future. If 
our difficulties in the past, and impending difficulties 
in the future, are due, to a great extent, to natural 
causes which are beyond our control, it only makes 
our financial condition the more alarming. So far as 
deficits in the past and coming deficits in the future 
are due to waste, mismanagement and extravagance, 
this waste, mismanagement and extravagance are 
within our power to control ; and therefore to this 
extent the danger may be averted. So far, however, 
as the growth of expenditure beyond revenue is due to 
those natural causes on which I have commented, it is 
obvious that there is only one way of meeting the 
difficulty, and that is to insist on rigid economy, to 
lessen our outlay, and so forbid the incurring of future 
liabilities. But in order to bring our exact position 
more clearly home to the House, let me again repeat 
that there has been a constant increase of taxation. 
Let me ask the House to bear in mind the memorable 



16 INDIAN FINANCE. 

words of Lord Mayo, which, describe the political 
danger of this augmented taxation ; let me also ask 
you to keep steadily in view this fact — that we have 
used up all sources of taxation, and that we have been 
constantly borrowing, which means increased taxation 
in the future. Between England and India there is 
this fundamental distinction, and it is one which cannot 
be too carefully borne in mind. Increase of taxation 
is sufficiently serious in our own country. Any Govern- 
ment that has to propose it, as was shewn last year, 
finds it difficult to resist the unpopularity which is 
excited. But if increase of taxation is serious in Eng- 
land, it is a hundred times more serious in India. If 
some exceptional emergency should arise in our own 
country which would require live, ten, or fifteen addi- 
tional millions to be raised, we all know that the money 
could be obtained. The duty on some articles of 
general consumption, such as tea, sugar, and beer, could 
be increased. The income-tax might be raised to a 
shilling in the pound. But in India there is no article 
of general consumption from which increased revenue 
could be obtained. The income-tax, as I will presently 
shew, has been almost universally condemned as an 
impost entirely unsuited to India, and therefore I ven- 
ture to assert — and it is an opinion formed after the 
most careful inquiry, and confirmed by the highest 
financial authorities — that it would be impossible to 
raise five millions of additional taxation in India with- 
out creating evil and producing an amount of discontent 
which might make the boldest tremble for the tran- 
quillity of the country. But then we are brought face 
to face with this startling fact, that unless our present 



INDIAN FINANCE. 17 

scale of expenditure is curtailed, and unless the Govern- 
ment is forbidden to incur future liabilities — they have 
already proposed to spend £28,000,000 on State Rail- 
ways and £39,000,000 on Irrigation Works — something 
far more than £5, 00 0, 000 additional revenue will soon 
be required ; and from what source is the money to be 
obtained? Let me entreat the House to remember 
that a simple statement of income and expenditure 
during the last few years will utterly fail to give any 
true idea of our financial position. Our difficulties 
have been so pressing, such desperate efforts have been 
made to lessen the deficit and create a surplus, that, 
like embarrassed traders, the Government of India 
have been using up their capital, they have been ap- 
propriating to income what ought to have been devoted 
to reduce debt, they have been using funds which 
ought to have been kept to meet ulterior charges ; in 
fact, in a single sentence, they have been performing 
that financial operation which is known as discounting 
the future. In the accounts of 1869-70 there is stated 
as an item of income a miscellaneous land receipt of 
£427,000. After a good deal of cross-examination, it 
was found that this sum represents the accumulations 
arising from the sale of waste lands. The land is 
virtually the property of the Government, and there- 
fore at the very time that they are pursuing a policy of 
borrowing, they sell property, and use the proceeds as 
income. If it is urged that there is a precedent for 
this, there ' is certainly no precedent for taking the 
accumulations. But there are other instances of a still 
more striking kind. The capital of the following 
pension funds, namely, the Civil Service of £830,000, 
F. s. 2 



18 INDIAN FINANCE. 

Bengal Military of £470,000, Military and Orphan 
£480,000, and others, have been, or are in the process 
of being appropriated to income. The Comptroller of 
Finances admits amongst the miscellaneous receipts of 
1869-70 an item of £240,000, which is a part of the 
capital which has thus been appropriated. Therefore 
this sum, instead of being in any true sense of the 
word income, is simply a measure of the prodigality 
with which the Government is spending its capital. 
Let me single out one instance of like conduct, which, 
though the sum in question be small, is most significant. 
£115,000 of borrowed money was expended by the 
Indian Government in the Alexandria and Malta Tele- 
graph. The telegraph turning out a failure, was after- 
wards sold at a great discount, and the proceeds of the 
sale were appropriated as legitimate income. Mr 
Seccombe, the Secretary of the Financial Department 
of the India Office, questioned on this transaction, 
confessed that such was the method of carrying on 
financial transactions adopted by the Indian Govern- 
ment, that if a million were borrowed for the construc- 
tion of some public work, and if it were afterwards 
sold for £750,000, the latter sum would be ap- 
propriated to income, and might be used to secure 
an apparent surplus. One more instance might be 
mentioned. The annual tributes which have to be 
paid to us by some Native Princes have been capi- 
talised, and the capital has been devoted to income. 
After such revelations and such admissions, I can 
scarcely be called an alarmist if I assert that the accu- 
racy of the accounts is vitiated. The Comptroller of 
the Finances at Calcutta admitted that if there had not 



INDIAN FINANCE. 19 

been this appropriation of capital to income, the sur- 
plus of £118,000 announced in the year 1869-70 would 
would have been described as a deficit of more than 
half a million. The Financial Secretary at the India 
Office, referring to the fact that the Indian Govern- 
ment has a debt account, but no capital account, 
admits that no merchants would think of carrying on 
their business in this way. My mercantile friends in 
this House need not be reminded of what would be the 
result if they did. They would quickly find them- 
selves in the Insolvent Court. In the annals of rail- 
way mismanagement we have had striking examples of 
the results of the policy of applying capital to income. 
There may be a few years of meretricious prosperity, 
shares may be at a premium, large dividends may be 
paid, but the day of reckoning comes. A defence has 
been set up for the transactions just described on the 
ground that all governments are doing the like ; but, in 
the first place, it must be remembered that almost all 
Governments are spending more than they have, and 
are rapidly accumulating a load of indebtedness whence 
must spring trouble and difficulty in the future. And 
further, in reply to the assertion that India is only 
following in the steps of our own Government, there is 
this essential distinction between the two countries. 
India, unlike England, does not simply discharge the 
ordinary functions of Government, but carries out 
various industrial undertakings. In the construction 
of railways, irrigation, and other works, India does 
what in our own country would" be done by private 
traders or companies. She, therefore, ' ought to be 
bound by considerations which, if disregarded, would 

2—2 



20 INDIAN FINANCE. 

bring disaster on mercantile undertakings. If a mer- 
chant or a company were constantly borrowing they 
would know that it was prudent — I might use a far 
stronger expression — not to devote capital to income. 
If England is quoted to justify what has been done in 
India, I would say that perfect openness has always 
been the principle of our Budget, while it has required 
the most laborious research to disentomb the facts I 
have quoted from the darkness in which they were 
buried ; and humility compels me to say that the search 
has been so incomplete that far greater discoveries may 
be in store for other and more skilled explorers. If, 
then, the deficits during the last few years would have 
been more serious, and the few surpluses would have 
been diminished, or would have vanished altogether 
but for this misapplication of capital, it becomes more 
apparent than ever that unless there is a considerable 
reduction in expenditure the increase in taxation must 
be continuous and rapid. I have already referred to 
some of the financial considerations associated with 
increase of taxation, and I will ask the House to con- 
sider the subject in another light. One striking pecu- 
liarity of Indian finance, as was lately pointed out in 
one of a series of most able articles that have appeared 
in the Times on Indian affairs, is that she has no finan- 
cial reserve. "At the present moment she is in the 
position of spending every shilling at her command, 
and with every probability of having to spend a great 
deal more. Even in times of peace her resources are 
strained to make both ends meet." And when we find 
that this strain is so great that a mere question of 
£500,000 involves the continuance of the income-tax, 



INDIAN FINANCE. 21 

and when we further proceed to consider the extra- 
ordinary consensus of the highest financial authorities, 
condemning this tax as an impost entirely unsuited to 
India, and fraught with the gravest financial and poli- 
tical evils, it is almost superfluous to add another word 
to bring home to every one the critical, nay, even the 
perilous position, of Indian finance. I have said that 
the income-tax has been condemned by an extraordi- 
nary consensus of opinion. In making this statement 
I do not forget that the Under Secretary said that for 
every authority I could produce in opposition to the 
income-tax, he could at least produce an authority on 
the other side of equal weight and importance. If he 
has all these high authorities ready at his command, 
I must say he has made a very unlucky selection and 
has done very scant justice to his case. Who is it 
most natural to quote on such a subject as this ? Why 
of course it is those gentlemen who have held high 
financial positions in India, and those who have been 
practically concerned with the collection of the income- 
tax. Who does the Under Secretary quote ? One 
native newspaper and General Barrow. I have not a 
word to say against either of these authorities, but I 
venture to assert that for one paper (whether native 
or European) in favour of the income-tax at least ten 
are opposed to it. Although, of course, nothing is fur- 
ther from my intention than to disparage a single word 
of the praise which was bestowed by the Under 
Secretary on General Barrow, yet I could not gather 
that he had ever held any of the highest financial posi- 
tions in India. On the other side, I shall proceed to 
quote the opinions of three successive Indian Finance 



22 INDIAN FINANCE. 

Ministers, Sir C. Trevelyan, Mr Laing, and Mr Massey. 
In addition to their testimony, I shall quote the opi- 
nions of many high officials who have been practically 
acquainted with the assessment and levying of the 
income-tax. The House need not be reminded of Sir 
C. Trevelyan's action in reference to this tax. Through 
his opposition to it, India lost for a time the advantage 
of his eminent services, for he would not incur the 
responsibility of levying so dangerous an impost. Mr 
Laing says, in his evidence, that he regarded the 
income-tax as " about as bad and obnoxious a mode 
of raising revenue as it is possible to imagine in a 
country like India." He added: "I think that for 
an Oriental country, and with the Eastern habit 
of mind, any tax which imposes inquisition into in- 
dividual means is attended with innumerable evils, 
which are little felt in a country like England. 
The Oriental mind is particularly jealous and timid 
upon all those questions. The tendency to evasion, 
and even perjury, is perhaps the greatest evil. In 
the state of the country you have no means of getting 
accurately at the incomes of any, except the limited 
class of fundholders, and European officials, and so on; 
for all the others, for the mass of the native popula- 
tion, you have no accurate means of getting at them, 
and you are obliged to employ a large army of native 
subordinate officers, who, in a case like that, are 
almost certain to abuse their trust, and for every rupee 
that comes into the Treasury to extort two rupees 
out of the population that have to pay it." Mr Massey 
says the income-tax is fraught with great difficulties 
and dangers. The natives connect the idea of income- 



INDIAN FINANCE. 23 

tax with some prospective plan of confiscation, and 
they regard with a dread, and horror, and repugnance 
which I can hardly exaggerate, the creation of a ma- 
chinery which will enable the Government to levy 
such a tax. I desire to direct the particular atten- 
tion of the House to the following most significant 
words of Mr Massey : "Nothing on earth should in- 
duce me to hold office as Finance Minister if the 
condition imposed upon me by the Secretary of State 
was the maintenance of an income-tax as an ordinary 
source of revenue." Sir G. Campbell, the present Lieu- 
tenant-Governor of Bengal, says : — " The tax, to my 
surprise, chiefly falls on small cultivators and ryots. 
Amongst them so strong and bitter a feeling has been 
aroused that they threaten to migrate to Nepaul, 
where there is no income-tax." Mr C. H. Campbell, 
Commissioner of the Presidency Division in Bengal, 
stated in 1870: — "Since the British connection with 
India began, no measure has ever been introduced 
which caused such deep dislike to our rule, to use 
a mild term, and this, I can safely say, is the opinion 
of all classes, official as well as non- official, in this 
division." Mr Inglis, member of the Legislative Coun- 
cil at Calcutta, says : — " It may be true that only one in 
300 pays the tax, but it is equally true that out 
of the 299 remaining, at least one-half are subjected 
to the most vexatious oppression, inquisition, and 
extortion, when preliminary lists are being drawn up, 
and that a very large number of these men have to 
pay in order to keep their names out of the lists. 
For one who is legally responsible, twenty are as- 
sessed ; and,"- he says, " the tax is producing a demo- 



24 INDIAN FINANCE. 

ralising influence throughout the country. " Sir W. 
Muir confirms this opinion, after consulting many of 
the officials under him. The Hon. W. Robinson, 
official member of Council, quotes Mr Bruce Norton, 
Advocate-General of Madras, who says there exists 
at this moment, " in consequence of this taxation, 
a sullen feeling of discontent from one end of the 
Empire to the other." I fear I have already wearied 
the House with these quotations, or I could shew that 
the same opinions had been expressed by other most 
experienced officials who have been practically con- 
cerned in the levying of income-tax. But what has 
been said politically, socially, and financially con- 
demnatory of the income-tax suffices to leave the sup- 
porters of the Budget in this dilemma. If such a tax, 
is necessary in time of 'peace, our financial position 
cannot he described as too serious. If however, the 
tax is not absolutely necessary, the Government that 
maintains it cannot be too severely censured. Dealing, 
in the first place, with the former of these alterna- 
tives, what is the inevitable conclusion to be drawn 
if the Government persists in saying that the income- 
tax cannot be dispensed with during the present year ? 
It is the most ample confession of the desperateness 
of our financial situation. Would such a tax be main- 
tained, in the face of such official remonstrances and 
warnings as those just quoted, if the fiscal resources 
of India had not been so entirely exhausted that the 
Government is at its wits' end to obtain the £500,000 
which the tax yields ? But this is not all. If this 
tax is our last desperate resource in time of peace, it 
must be our chief reliance as expenditure increases. 



INDIAN FINANCE. 2o 

Who can calmly contemplate such a prospect ? I have 
already referred to Lord Mayo. No Governor-General 
ever more actively exerted himself to become ac- 
quainted with the feelings of the people. No one 
can accuse him of beinof either a theorist or an alarmist. 
He was above all things distinguished for strong com- 
mon sense, and, as his untimely end proved, he was 
courageous almost to a fault. And if he has affirmed 
that "the increase of taxation has created a political 
danger, the magnitude of which can hardly be over- 
estimated," to what proportion will this danger grow 
if increased expenditure is to continue, and if all the 
additional revenue that is needed is to be provided 
out of the income-tax ? But we who think that the 
income-tax, as an ordinary source of revenue, might 
be dispensed with, and that expenditure also might 
be so much reduced as to enable some additional taxes 
to be considerably lightened, we, I say, who hold these 
opinions, have not to face the difficulties and dangers 
which they must be prepared to meet who, like the 
present Indian Government, assert that the income- 
tax must be maintained, and who seem bent on in- 
creasing future expenditure by embarking on a vast 
and indefinite outlay on public works, many of which, 
as I shall shew from the experience of the past, are 
sure to prove unproductive. But it will be fairly said, 
those who assert that the income-tax need not have 
been imposed during the present year, and that other 
taxes might be reduced by a curtailment of expendi- 
ture, are bound to shew how the attainment of this 
object may be practically realized. Before comment- 
ing on specific acts of waste and extravagance, it 



26 INDIAN FINANCE. 

may, in the first place, be remarked that the Go- 
vernment of India is so arranged as to reduce the 
guarantees for economy to an absolute minimum. 
In the days of the East India Company, India was, 
to a certain extent, protected by the self-interest 
of proprietors. At any rate, they would see with 
jealous watchfulness that India was not unfairly 
charged for many things which England ought to 
pay. Under the present system there are four or 
five distinct persons who can spend. There are the 
Secretary of State, the Governor-General, the Go- 
vernor of Bombay, the Governor of Madras, the Lieu- 
tenant-Governor of the North-west Provinces. There 
is no individual responsibility, no distinct control. 
There are also various great spending departments. 
General Strachey, who probably knows more of what 
goes on in the Public Works Department than any 
one else, says, speaking of this Department, " There is 
no specific personal responsibility." It is sometimes 
said that all expenditure is ultimately under the con- 
trol of the Secretary of State, but this, of course, is a 
mere fiction. Moreover, as can be shewn by reference 
to one of the highest legal authorities, it is impossible 
to define the powers of the Secretary of State. Mr 
Fitzjames Stephen has recently said, " In order to 
ascertain the powers of the Secretary of State for India, 
it is constantly necessary to find out what were the 
powers of the Court of Directors ; and, in order to 
ascertain that, it is necessary to see how far the 
Charter Acts of 1854, 1834, 1814, 1794, and the Regu- 
lating Act of 1773 repealed, or continued, or revived 
each other's provisions." But, if it is maintained that 



INDIAN FINANCE. 27 

the ultimate control in all financial questions is exer- 
cised by the Secretary of State, let us ask what is his 
power and what is his position. He is simply a mem- 
ber of the Cabinet ; our Cabinet is the product of party 
Government, and therefore it comes to this : that India 
has to put up with all the disadvantages, and enjoys 
none of the advantages of party Government. It is a 
truism to assert that party Government does not give 
an effective administrative machine. Directly a Minis- 
ter begins to know his work, he may have to retire into 
Opposition, or party exigencies may require that he 
should be shifted to some other department, of the busi- 
ness of which he is thoroughly ignorant. During the 
first three years that I was in Parliament, there were 
three Secretaries of State for India, and, I think, four 
Under Secretaries. On the other hand, party Govern- 
ment gives us this advantage, that it brings the 
pressure of public opinion rapidly to bear upon the 
Government. But as India has no representative in 
this House, and little public opinion in her support out 
of doors, she has to bear the disadvantages of party 
Government without any of its advantages. The Secre- 
tary of State, as I have said, is simply a member of the 
Cabinet, and what chance is there of the affairs of India 
receiving adequate consideration when the Cabinet is 
perplexed by a host of questions which may affect the 
fate of an administration ? India may be neglected, 
her money may be wasted, her affairs may be mis- 
managed, it will not affect the interests of party, it will 
scarcely raise a ripple on the surface of politics. No 
angry constituents will give trouble or annoyance to a 
Treasury "Whip." I suppose the hon. member for 



28 INDIAN FINANCE. 

Shaftesbury (Mr G. Glyn) would as little expect to be 
disturbed by the politics of Timbuctoo as he would to 
have an uneasy moment about the affairs of India. But 
the assertion that the constitution of the Cabinet is 
such as to secure no adequate protection for the in- 
terests of India can be specifically substantiated. A 
recent Finance Minister distinctly stated in a letter to 
the Times " that the finances of India were repeatedly 
sacrificed to the wishes of the Horse Guards and to the 
exigencies of English estimates." But on this point 
there is more important, because more precise, testi- 
mony from Mr W. T. Thornton, who for years has been 
one of the leading officials at the India Office. India, 
as well as our own country, cannot feel too grateful to 
Mr Thornton for his outspoken courage. He says: — 
"Judging from experience, I should say there is not 
the smallest chance of any fair treatment of the in- 
terests of India where the interests of England come 
into opposition to them." And again, referring to a 
series of transactions, one result of which was that 
India was obliged to pay two-fifths of the cost of an 
almost worthless telegraph cable laid down between 
Alexandria and Malta, he admits that "if you repre- 
sent the English Government by an individual A, and 
the Indian Government by an individual B, that A 
pursued towards B uncommonly sharp practice, and 
that in ordinary life B would not submit to it if he 
could help it." Competent authorities have repeatedly 
stated that the pecuniary arrangements that have been 
made since the amalgamation of our own army with 
that of India have inflicted a heavy annual loss upon 
India — one of not less than a million. General Pears, 



INDIAN FINANCE. 29 

Military Secretary at the India Office, says that India 
has to pay an extravagant price for the recruits that 
we send her, and states that, if she could obtain her 
recruits herself, instead of getting them through our 
Government, she could save 20 per cent. A remon- 
strance was addressed to the War Office on the subject 
six months before he gave his evidence, but no notice 
up to that time had been taken of it. During the 
Abyssinian war, although India was in no way respon- 
sible for or interested in that contest, we drew a large 
portion of her army from her without giving her any 
compensation. If it were necessary to repeat examples 
of burthens being unjustly thrown on India, I might 
refer to the fact that we compel her to pay the cost 
of the Persian Mission and a considerable portion of the 
consulate charges in China. She has nothing what- 
ever to do with the mission to Persia. The minister 
to Persia is appointed not by her, but by our own 
Foreign Office in Downing-street ; and there is not 
the slightest reason why she should contribute to our 
consular charges in China any more than Australia. 
When the Sultan paid us the compliment of visiting our 
shores, a somewhat niggard hospitality was relieved by 
a splendid ball at the India House. By a master stroke 
of equal injustice and meanness, this was charged to the 
Indian account. And when a Prince of our own Poyal 
House visited our Indian possessions, the travelling 
expenses of his companions were defrayed from the 
same source. I need not comment on these facts, ex- 
cept to say that every gentleman must be ashamed of 
them. The Government who sanctions them does the 
English nation the injustice of exhibiting us in the 



30 INDIAN FINANCE. 

eyes of educated Hindoos and Mussulmans as if we 
were mean and grasping. The English people, if they 
had adequate knowledge of such transactions, would 
most heartily disapprove of them. They shew that 
there is no sufficient pressure of public opinion in Eng- 
land adequately to protect the interests of India. Would 
that were all. On the contrary, pressure has been used 
in England to extract money from India. Not only 
have her interests been sacrificed when they clashed 
with the political interests of parties in England, but 
also when they clashed with commercial interests. India 
seems too often to be looked upon as if she had been 
specially created to increase the profits of English mer- 
chants, to afford valuable appointments for English 
youths, and to give us a bountiful supply of cheap 
cotton. About twenty years since was commenced the 
system of guaranteeing 5 per cent, interest on railways 
and other public works in India. It is impossible to 
devise any scheme which would more inevitably lead 
to waste and extravagance, and destroy every security 
for economy and efficiency. It has lately been reported 
that in one railway, the Great Indian Peninsular Rail- 
way, two thousand bridges, viaducts, and other masonry 
works will require reconstruction. Five per cent, gua- 
ranteed on the revenues of India represents something 
more than the current rate of interest, and therefore 
it was of comparatively speaking little consequence 
how unproductively the money was expended, for those 
who advanced it are always certain of a remunerative 
return. Up to the present time about £90,000,000 
has been spent on guaranteed railways ; the amount of 
interest which the Government has had to make good 



INDIAN FINANCE. 31 

up to the present time has been £33,000,000. The 
contracts are arranged on conditions most unfavourable 
to India. Government can at any time be compelled 
to take over a company, repaying to the shareholders 
not the actual value of the line, but also all the capital 
that has been wasted on ill- constructed works. Upon 
the Calcutta and South-Eastern Railway about £600,000 
was expended. On this outlay 5 per cent, was gua- 
ranteed. The scheme proving a disastrous failure, the 
Government took it over at par, and it does not now 
nearly pay its working expenses. £3,000,000 was ex- 
pended on the Jubblepore branch of the East India 
Railway. The usual 5 per cent, was guaranteed, and 
it only just pays its working expenses. Other still more 
disastrous instances might be quoted. In the Scinde, 
Punjaub, and Delhi Railway more than £8,000,000 was 
expended, upon which 5 per cent, has been guaranteed 
by the Government. The net annual return at the 
present time is about £50,000, and the Government 
annually loses about £400,000 on this disastrous un- 
dertaking. The shareholders, however, are perfectly 
happy. They are certain of their 5 per cent., and the 
£100 shares are at the present time quoted at £6 pre- 
mium. But this system of guaranteeing interest has 
not been confined to railways. £1,000,000 was raised 
some time since for the Madras Irrigation Works. Of 
course the expenditure greatly exceeded the estimates. 
£600,000 more had to be raised, and the works will 
probably cost at least £2,000,000 before they are com- 
pleted. As yet no return has been realised, and com- 
petent authorities say that the works have been so 
ill-constructed that no return ever can be realised. 



32 INDIAN FINANCE. 

Although not a shilling of profit has been yielded upon 
the outlay, the Government has been obliged to pay 
all the time its 5 per cent., and the shares are con- 
sequently at a premium. If I were not afraid of weary- 
ing the House I could go on hour after hour describing 
similar disasters. There are one or two other examples 
that I cannot forbear from mentioning. £1,000,000 
was raised by a private company in 10,000 shares of 
£100 each for the Orissa Irrigation Works. The shares 
fell to a heavy discount — they were quoted in the 
London money market at £60, and were unsaleable at 
that price. The Government bought the Company at 
par, and, as if it was not enough to make this extra- 
vagant bargain, in a moment of inexplicable generosity 
£50,000 more was given additional to be distributed 
among the employes of the Company. £200,000 has 
been advanced to the Calcutta Port Fund — this has 
been written off as a bad debt. £250,000 of public 
money has been sunk and entirely lost in the Port 
Canning scheme. It is difficult to form an adequate 
estimate of the enormous loss which will result to the 
Government from taking over the Elphinstone Land 
Scheme. With these, and a hundred other similar 
facts before us, a child may understand how difficult 
it is to create a balance between revenue and ex- 
penditure in India, and how easy it would be, if the 
finances of India were managed with adequate care and 
economy, to dispense with the income-tax, with all 
its dangers, and to reduce other taxes which press so 
heavily on the people. But how are we to insure that 
the finances of India will be managed in the future 
with greater care and economy ? Every effort should 



INDIAN FINANCE. 33 

be made to interest the English public in the affairs 
of. India. If we are not mindful of the moral responsi- 
bility we have assumed in undertaking the government 
of 150,000,000 of people, we may perhaps awaken to 
the enormous stake that we have in the country. 
£180,000,000 of English capital has been embarked 
on the security of Indian revenues. In alluding to 
the vast amount of English capital invested on the 
security of the revenues of India, I must refer to that 
part of the speech of the Under Secretary in which he 
presumes to intimate that certain people, who do not 
take the same hopeful view of Indian finance that he 
does, must be bitterly disappointed because the present 
price of Indian securities is so high. The House, I am 
sure, will agree with me that such an insinuation is un- 
generous and unjust. What right has he to suppose 
that, in criticising the financial policy of India, we 
are actuated by any other motives than a desire to 
prevent the continuance of a line of conduct which we 
believe to be mischievous and dangerous ? The Under 
Secretary could not be more pleased than I should be 
to see a real improvement in the financial condition 
of India produce a rise in the price of Indian securities. 
There is never any advantage in concealing the truth, 
and I believe the present high price of Indian securi- 
ties is in no small part due to the fact that investors 
believe that England, if anything went wrong with 
the revenues of India, would be, if not legally, at least 
morally, responsible for the money that has been ad^ 
vanced on the security of Indian revenues. The sooner 
there is a clear and distinct understanding on this point 
the better. It is probable that investors have been 

F.S. 3 



34 INDIAN FINANCE. 

deluded into the belief that England is either directly 
or indirectly responsible for money advanced to India, 
partly in consequence of an Act which this House un- 
fortunately passed some years since, which allows trust 
money to be invested in Indian securities. At any 
rate it is important that there should be no ambiguity 
in the matter. If England is not responsible the 
sooner investors are made to understand this the 
better. If England is responsible, let India enjoy the 
advantage of being able to. obtain money at the same 
rate of interest as is represented by our funds. There 
cannot properly be any middle course* Those who-, at 
the present time, invest in Indian securities obtain a 
higher rate- of interest than those who invest in our 
funds, and this higher interest they ought not to enjoy 
if the security is the same as it would be if England 
is to be held ultimately responsible for the money 
borrowed by India. The investors in Indian securities 
are so numerous and so widely scattered that if their 
interest in India were awakened simply by pecuniary 
considerations this House would soon reflect the feeling, 
and a Government would then know that they could 
no longer remain passive spectators of acts of extra- 
vagance and mismanagement like those which have 
been described. But although we, must look to the 
growth of public opinion as the only permanent cure, 
yet there are certain things which might at once be 
done which would go far to alleviate present diffi- 
culties. In the first place, this House should express 
a positive opinion that never again should the Govern- 
ment give guaranteed interest on capital, so that pro- 
jectors should be insured against the- evil consequences 



INDIAN FINANCE. 35 

of their own mismanagement. Secondly the military 
expenditure should be thoroughly looked into. Mr 
Massey endorses the opinion already expressed, holding 
it highly probable that a more systematic revision of 
the estimates would result in the saving of a million 
annually. Lord Sandhurst, when retiring from his 
position of Commander-in-Chief in India, said that 
economy and increased strength would result from 
merging the two armies of Bombay and Madras, and 
"that so long as the separate system lasted he wa3 
hopeless of real economy." But probably the most 
essential service that this House can render to India 
is to express its opinion on the policy which the 
Government seems determined to pursue of carrying 
out a great system of public works with borrowed 
money. As long ago as 1863 Sir 0. Trevelyan said, 
V Has the Government yet to learn that it is beyond 
their power to furnish a proper industrial outfit for 
such a country as India ? The limits have already been 
passed when they can exercise an effective control, and^ 
with regard to works carried out directly by the State, 
there is certain to be careless and wasteful management 
through an inattention to details. 1 ' Are such warnings, 
as these to be disregarded ? Will the House hesitate, 
after the loss which public works have already entailed, 
to express its disapproval of the Government continuing 
a vast system of borrowing for industrial undertakings ? 
They talk about spending £30,000,000 upon railways. 
The best lines of country have already been occupied, 
and the railways entail a heavy annual loss. Who will 
administer this money? Why, it will be administered 
by a department tha,t allowed a vast outlay upon 

3—2 



36 INDIAN FINANCE. 

barracks, some of which tumbled down as soon as they 
were completed, and others were so faulty in construc- 
tion that they were pronounced useless. Who will 
watch over the expenditure ? Why, a department 
whose accounts are, by its own confession, in inextri- 
cable confusion. From the evidence given by General 
Strachey, the moving spirit of the department, it may 
be fairly concluded that the accounts are not kept in 
such a way as to enable an mtelligent person to ascer- 
tain whether works called reproductive are really so. 
You cannot tell whether the money voted for them 
is actually spent upon them. An attempt has in vain 
been tried to get the Financial Department to publish 
a clear account of the loans that were raised and how 
they were expended. Railways and other public works 
may be extremely useful in themselves, but if they are 
conducted on too costly a scale, if there is no effec- 
tive supervision, if there is that careless and wasteful 
management, through inattention to details, on which 
Sir C. Trevelyan comments, the most useful works may 
become extremely unprofitable. A simile will exactly 
explain what is being done hi India. You visit a friend 
who is deriving an income of about £30,000 a year 
from his estates; he has many incumbrances, and he is 
spending somewhat more than his income — say £32,000 
a year. He takes you into his confidence ; you go over 
his estate, and you see at once his rent-roll can be in- 
creased. You say, "You require a railway to bring your 
produce to market, some of your land requires irrigation, 
you need new roads, and new buildings; carry out these 
works and your income will soon be £40,000 a year." 
You return a few years afterwards, and you find that 



INDIAN FINANCE. 37 

the £10,000 a year extra has been obtained, but, on 
looking into the matter somewhat further, your friend 
says, "It is true I have the extra £10,000 a year, but it 
has cost £15,000 a year to get it," and he is more em- 
barrassed than ever; but you say, "How has this come 
to pass? Why have the works been carried out so 
extravagantly?" The friend says, "How could I help 
it ? I couldn't get the railway made without giving 
a guarantee, and this encourages extravagance so much 
that it has cost as much as if the rails had been made 
of silver instead of iron. Many of my irrigation works 
have been so ill constructed that they yield an inade- 
quate return ; the buildings have been erected of such 
bad materials that many of them tumbled down, and 
others were of no use, I have been able to exercise 
no control over the expenditure. I have had one agent 
in London, another upon the estate, and three or four 
under-agents, all of whom have been giving orders; 
there has been no direct responsibility, and where so 
many persons have been spending it has been im- 
possible to concentrate responsibility, and the accounts 
are in inextricable confusion." This at once will be 
seen to be no exaggerated description, when we know 
what has taken place in the Public Works Department, 
and when we know that India has an agent in London, 
an agent in Calcutta, and local agents in Madras and 
Bombay, all of whom have been spending her money 
in what are called industrial improvements. Some of 
the lavish expenditure is made under excuses less 
specious even than industrial improvements. When 
we find an item of £155,000 for a new country-house 
for the Governor of Bombay, and discover a marked 



38 INDIAN FINANCE. 

disinclination on the part of a high official to state who 
authorized this prodigal expenditure, we are led to 
long for a greater amount of personal responsibility 
in the Finance Department, and some security that 
the expenditure has all come under the notice of some 
central authority. One fatal error underlies, not only 
the expenditure in the Public Works Department, but 
the whole of our government in India. Our govern- 
ment is far too expensive for so poor a country. No- 
thing has been a more fruitful source of serious evils 
than the opinion that is so prevalent in England that 
India is an extremely rich country. We have been 
misled by a certain kind of barbaric splendour which 
is displayed by native Princes who visit this country; 
and by remembrance of the booty that has, in the 
time of war, been found in some native palace. It is, 
however, almost impossible to overstate the great 
poverty of the mass of the people. Their ordinary 
wages are often not more than 3c/. or 4 c/. a day. The 
rent of land paid to the Government is often not more 
than -is. per acre. We must bear these facts in mind 
in order justly to appreciate the monstrous folly and 
extravagance of constructing railways on as costly a 
scale as if they were to connect such centres of wealth 
and population as those existing in our own country ; 
whereas they pass through districts where the people, 
only earning 3c7. a day, are too poor to travel, and 
where there are no mines and no manufactures. It is 
only necessary to remember that at the present time 
there is no financial reserve in India to shew the peril, 
nay, the folly, of undertaking public works some of 
which are certain to be unproductive. In asking the 



INDIAN FINANCE. 39 

House to disapprove of carrying out public works, 
either by guaranteeing interest or by raising loans, it 
is not difficult to anticipate the argument which will 
be used on the other side. It will be said, that if the 
State refuses either to assist or *to carry out public 
works in India on its own account they will never be 
constructed by private enterprise. In the first place, 
it may be replied that as long as it is known that a 
certain amount of pressure will obtain a guarantee, 
or will secure the expenditure of State money, there 
is no chance that anything will be done by private 
enterprise. It is just as certain that such State in- 
tervention will destroy private enterprise as it is that 
a tender exotic will be killed by>a chilling; frost. When 
it is remembered that British capital is freely invested 
in every quarter of the world, that vast sums are lent 
to embarrassed and unstable Governments, that millions 
are readily embarked in such hazardous speculations as 
Mexican -and South American mines, how can it be 
maintained, without casting the severest reproach upom 
our government ©f India, that India, governed and 
protected by us, is the only country which the English 
capitalist will avoids When deputations from th© 
City or from Chambers of Commerce wait upon "the 
Secretary of State urging him to grant a guarantee, 
or pressing him to spend the revenues of India in 
throwing open, for instance, the Godavery, in order 
to cheapen the carriage of cotton, would he not be 
acting with prudence and wisdom if he said, " The 
resources of India have already been so severely 
strained, our means of obtaining increased revenue 
have been so exhausted, that I cannot incur the peril 



40 INDIAN FINANCE. 

of sanctioning fresh liabilities. If, gentlemen, you 
think that the works you ask the Government to con- 
struct are likely to prove profitable, I shall be delighted 
to afford you every facility for embarking your money, 
and I shall rejoice, both for your sake and for the sake 
of India, in aiding you to find an eligible investment 
for a portion of that accumulated wealth for which, in 
every quarter of the world but India, you are so anxious 
to find a profitable employment." If Secretaries of 
State had adopted such a policy in the past, or were 
prepared to adopt it in the future, the finances of India 
would now be in a very different position, and many 
threatening difficulties and dangers would be averted. 
Above all things, India for the next few years requires 
rest, and nothing would be so likely to secure her 
this as a firm resolve that there should be no more 
guarantees, and that, for the present at least, no public 
works should be constructed except from any surplus 
that might be saved out of ordinary revenue. But I 
must, if the House will kindly bear with me for a short 
time longer, say a few words on a scheme which has 
been lately brought into operation, which is calculated 
to conceal from us in this country an increase of taxa- 
tion which will be imposed on the people under the 
form of an augmentation of local burdens. The decen- 
tralisation scheme to which I refer will transfer several 
charges which have hitherto been Imperial to the 
Provincial Governments. A fixed sum is, in the first 
instance, to be voted from Imperial Funds for these 
charges, but the sum is at the outset confessedly 
inadequate to meet them; the charges are certain to 
increase, and therefore the deficiency will have to be 



INDIAN FINANCE. 41 

met by a constant augmentation in provincial taxation. 
We are beginning to recognise the fact that the growth 
of local taxation in our own country is one of the most 
serious questions which can engage our attention. 
Local taxation will soon become in India of far greater 
moment than it is even in our own country. The 
growth of local taxation in India is less visible than 
Imperial taxation, and therefore is a more insidious 
evil. We have all heard of the agitation against the 
income-tax in India; but few members of this House 
are aware of the fact that there is a much more onerous 
income-tax in Bombay for local purposes. The Im- 
perial income-tax is only 1 per cent., and does not 
reach incomes of less than £100; the local income- 
tax in Bombay reaches incomes of £5. Scarcely a 
month passes without the people being worried and 
alarmed either by the actual imposition or by the 
threat to impose some new local burden upon them. 
At one time it is a Boad cess; at another time it is an 
Education cess. Quite recently an Act was passed by 
the Government of India — I believe it has not received 
the sanction of the Secretary of State — which declared 
that if the Punjaub irrigation canals did not yield a 
profit of 7 per cent., the people who live near the 
canals should pay the irrigation rate even if they made 
no use of the water. It has been stated that it was 
intended to extend the provisions of the Act to the 
rest of India. Is it any wonder that the people are 
irritated, perplexed, or alarmed? It has been argued 
in justification of such a policy that the people who 
refuse to use the water do not know their own inter- 
ests, and they ought to be compelled to do that which 



42 INDIAN FINANCE. 

is good for them. This is paternal government with a 
vengeance ! Why, of course, it will soon be proposed 
that if the State Kail ways do not pay 7 per cent., the 
people who don't use the railways shall be made to pay 
because they don't know what is good for them ; they 
ought to travel by railway, and they ought not to use 
any cheaper mode of 'transporting their merchandise. 
The Punjaub Canal Act, to which I have referred, con- 
tains a still more objectionable provision, for it declares 
that if enough voluntary labour was not forthcoming 
for the construction of canals, they should be made by 
forced labour. No wonder that the people are not 
enamoured of industrial works when they find them- 
selves threatened with serfdom and with forced contri- 
butions. If our own Government were to bring forward 
any such unfortunate proposal, we know what would 
be the result. They w6uld immediately have ! to suc- 
cumb to the pressure of public opinion. But the peo- 
ple of India ■ can bring no pressure of public opinion t© 
bear upon their Government; they, it is true, in the 
last resource, look to this House for a redress of their 
wrongs, but 'their complaints have here found but a 
faint and feeble echo. One of the wisest of Indian 
statesmen, Sir D. Mac'leod, has warned us against the 
danger of imposing any new tax without first consulting 
the natives. New taxes are constantly being imposed., 
and the problem of how we are to consult the natives 
remains unsolved 1 . In conclusion, I wish only to say, 

1 The fact that India has not representative institutions and that 
England has is a sufficient explanation of the fact that decentralisation 
may be a very good thing in the latter country and an equally bad thing in 
the former. The local representative institutions in England provide a 
security that the money devoted to local purposes will be more economi- 



INDIAN FINANCE. 43 

as it is with individuals, so it is with Governments; 
when there is waste and extravagance in large matters, 
there is certain to be petty and irritating economy in 
small details. Hoyal entertainments can be given in 
this country at the expense of the Indian people ; whilst 
princely palaces can be built for local governors ; and 
millions can be squandered in ill-constructed barracks; 
gigantic schemes, which won't pay their working ex- 
penses, can be sanctioned. AH this can be done, till 

cally expended if it is obtained from local instead of from Imperial funds. 
People think that if money is spent in their own locality and is provided 
from the national exchequer, only a very small portion of it is really ''con- 
tributed by them. In India, however, it is not the people, but those who 
govern them, 'who determine what money shall be spent for local purposes, 
arid from what taxes it siiall be provided. The people, therefore, have' ho 
voice in checking or controlling the expenditure; and, as a local tax will 
attract much less attention than an Imperial tax, local burdens may increase 
in India without attracting half so much attention, either in that country or 
in England, as if there had been a similar increase in Imperial taxation. It 
must moreover be recollected that the Government of India is really less 
under the influence of public opinion than it was formerly. During theiast 
few years the practice has grown up of the Governor-General and his 
Council migrating to Simla for a great part of each year. What would be 
thought if the English Parliament spent a considerable portion of its time 
far away in the wilds of Sutherlandshire ? This migration to Simla wastes 
a great deal of time, and involves an annual expenditure of ,£56,000. But 
this is a small part of the evil. The only faint semblance of representation 
which exists in India is that a certain number of non-official members are 
nominated to the Council of the Governor-General. Some of these non- 
official members are European merchants ; others are natives. The mer- 
chants have not the time to go to Simla, and the natives usually will not go. 
Consequently the migration to Simla to a great extent destroys the only 
slight element of representation that there is in the Government of India. 
No one would, of course, object to a Governor- General having necessary 
rest and relaxation, but the disadvantage of the system, which has only 
grown up within the last few years, is that the Council and other officials 
are taken away from the seat of Government. Much valuable information 
is contained on this and other points in the evidence recently given before 
the Finance Committee by Mr Dacosta. His testimony is the more im- 
portant because he has resided nearly thirty years in India, and is one of 
the few non-official witnesses that have been examined. 



44 INDIAN FINANCE. 

the Government, waking up as it were from a dream, 
looks round and says: — "We must be economical; we 
will, as a compensation for the thousands we are 
wasting, see if we can't save a few pence;" and it 
is almost superfluous to add that the saving is effected 
in the very way which is likely to produce the 
keenest sense of injustice amongst the Indian people. 
As some small compensation for the inequality under 
which the natives were placed in having to come 
to England to compete in the Indian Civil Service 
Examinations, eight Scholarships of the annual value 
of £200 each were granted ; it was necessary to save 
something, and these scholarships were abolished. 
Why, the whole sum saved does not represent a fifth 
of the interest of the money spent in providing a 
country-house for the Governor of Bombay. But this 
is not all. When the Scholarships were abolished, it 
was said that some natives should be admitted direct 
to the Civil Service. This promise has remained as 
much a dead letter as if it had never been given. 
Let me earnestly entreat the House of Commons and 
the English nation not to delude themselves with the 
belief that such acts as these are not felt and are not 
commented upon by the Indian people. They are 
talked about, and they kindle a sense of injustice in 
millions of human breasts, and this sense of injustice it 
will require all our wisdom and all our statesmanship 
to allay. I believe that the great mass of the English 
nation desires that our rule in India should be for 
the good of the people. Our errors and our short- 
comings are due more to ignorance than to intention. 
It has been proverbially a somewhat thankless task 



INDIAN FINANCE. 45 

to attempt to direct attention in this House to 
the affairs of our great dependency. The subject is 
one of such vast extent and importance that it is 
necessary to labour at it for years to obtain any thing- 
like a complete knowledge of the subject. For some 
years I have devoted almost the whole spare time at 
my disposal to the question, and no one can be more 
conscious than I am of my imperfect knowledge. 
Whenever I have attempted to direct the attention 
of this House to Indian affairs, it has invariably hap- 
pened, as it has on the present occasion, that I have 
aroused the irritability of the Under Secretary, and 
been censured from the Treasury bench for my pre- 
sumption. No amount of labour, no dread of an 
Under Secretary, and no Ministerial rebukes can, how- 
ever, be of any consequence compared with the im- 
portance of doing whatever may lie in one's power to 
create an adequate amount of interest in India. My 
experience in this House has at least taught me that 
when a Minister is very angry it is the clearest indica- 
tion a private member possibly can have that it is 
his duty to persevere with the subject he has in hand. 
This, at any rate, is my firm resolve with regard to 
the affairs of India. No one can deny that the people 
of India consider that they are primarily governed by 
the British Parliament ; and it is to this House they 
look for a redress of their grievances. A German diplo- 
matist and statesman once said that nothing struck 
him so much as this, that, in Germany, the possession 
of India was looked upon as the greatest distinction 
which England had obtained, and that the loss of India, 
through misgovernment, would be the greatest blow 



4G INDIAN FINANCE. 

to our reputation, and would be fatal to our prestige ; 
and yet, lie said, so little did we seem to appreciate 
the vast responsibility of the trust we had assumed, 
that he found there was. not so much attention given 
to Indian affairs, and there was not so much known 
of the subject, in England as in Germany. Fully 
sharing in the opinion that the loss of India would be 
the greatest disaster and the greatest dishonour that 
could befall this- country, and would be a great mis- 
fortune to the Indian people themselves, let us hope 
that this country may shew a kindlier sympathy with 
their feelings, and a firmer determination to do them 
justice. Fifteen years ago, the Queen issued a pror 
ckmation which produced a deep impression from one 
end of India to the other. She said, speaking as the 
head of the English nation, " We hold ourselves bound 
to the natives of our Indian territories by the same 
obligations of duty which bind us to all our other 
subjects, and those obligations, by the blessing of Al- 
mighty God, we shall faithfully and conscientiously 
fulfil." If we still desire that this promise should be 
kept, are we not bound to do everything that can 
be done, by wise administration and by rigid economy, 
to avoid that increase of financial burdens which, in 
the words of one whose loss we all deplore, has already 
produced a feeling of discontent amongst all classes 
in India, and has created a political danger the mag- 
nitude of which can hardly be over-estimated ? 



INDIAN FINANCE. 



INDIAN BUDGET 1 , 1873. 

Fifteen years ago it was proclaimed by the Queen, 
speaking in the name of the English nation, that "We 
hold, ourselves bound to the natives of our Indian 
territories by the same obligations of duty which bind 
us to all our other subjects*, and those obligations, by 
the blessing of Almighty God, w& shall faithfully and 
conscientiously fulfil.** A more solemn promise than 
is contained in these words was never given by a great 
nation. How has it been fulfilled ? When what 
has happened this evening is known by the Indian 
people, an impression will be produced through the 
length and breadth of that land that the promise, 
potent as it might have been in its influence for good, 
is to be altogether ignored. When the Indian Budget 
is introduced at a quarter-past ten o'clock at the very 

1 The Under Secretary for. India, Mr Grant Duff, made his annual stater 
ment on the Indian Budget at a quarter-past ten on Thursday evening;, 
July 31st, !8?3\ Mr Fawcett rose at half-past eleven to reply to Mr Grant 
Duff, and moved the following resolution : " That in the opinion of this 
House, the present constitution of the Government of India fails to secure 
an efficient or economical management of its finances, and that this House 
views with apprehension the state of local taxation in that country, and iq 
of opinion that its financial condition must be regarded as unsatisfactory so*, 
long as the Income-Tax forms it^ouly financial r^serYe.* ? 



48 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

fag end of the Session, when it is arranged that the 
only discussion which the Government gives to Indian 
affairs is brought forward at a time specially selected 
for its inconvenience, when the Indian people see 
that more respect is shewn to the most trumpery 
question ever debated in this House than is vouchsafed 
to questions vitally affecting their welfare — when all 
this is made as clear to them as the sun at noonday, 
can they arrive at any other conclusion, than that the 
Government is bent on pursuing the suicidal course of 
treating the affairs of India with contemptuous neglect ? 
The Under Secretary (Mr Grant Duff), in the course 
of the remarks to which we have just listened, has 
described me as the spokesman of a financial panic. I 
will presently shew what amount of truth there is in 
this assertion, but I will now simply say that in anything 
I have ever done in reference to India my object has 
been not to excite financial panics, but I have been, 
and I hope always shall be, influenced by no other 
motive than to do the little which can be done by one 
member of this House to arouse an adequate amount of 
interest in the welfare of the great dependency which 
we have taken upon ourselves to govern. When the 
Indian Budget was discussed last year, I was permitted 
through the kind indulgence of the House to occupy so 
large a portion of the modicum of time usually allotted 
to Indian affairs, that many may not unreasonably 
think I ought to be silent on the present occasion. 
But at the close of the remarks which I then made, 
I ventured to promise that I would devote all the time 
at my disposal to the subject of India. The result 
has been that I cannot be silent on the present occasion. 



INDIAN FINANCE. II 49 

The Under Secretary last year predicted that nothing 
I could say in reference to India could possibly be of 
any value or importance, but a remarkable change 
seems to have come over the spirit of the scene. His 
attitude has entirely altered^ for he has now paid me 
the compliment of devoting a considerable portion of 
his speech to answering me by anticipation. Taking 
the first clause in my resolution which refers to defects 
in the constitution of the Government of India, he 
appears to be puzzled to hit upon the defects to which 
I allude, and he cannot understand in what respect 
the present Government of India fails to secure an 
efficient and economical management of its finances. 
Before I conclude I believe it will not be difficult to 
shew that the finances of India cannot be managed 
either efficiently or economically whilst the system of 
her government remains as it is. Nothing will be 
more easy than to verify this assertion by adducing 
specific instances of almost incredible waste and extra- 
vagance. But what seems to excite the greatest sur- 
prise in the Under Secretary is that the local taxation 
of India should be brought under the consideration of 
this House as a subject calculated to excite grave 
apprehension. He passed the question lightly by as 
if it were one scarcely worthy of any notice. But 
there was sitting by his side the Bight Hon. gentleman 
(Mr Ayrton) who has now for three years presided 
over the Finance Committee with an impartiality and 
a courtesy which every member of that committee 
must, I am sure, be anxious to recognize. It is worthy 
of remark, that whereas the Under Secretary only con- 
descended to spend an occasional hour in the com- 
F. s. 4 



50 INDIAN FINANCE. II 

mittee, Mr Ayrton, though, chairman of another com- 
mittee, has scarcely ever been absent. Day after day 
during the present session, when the Under Secretary 
was absent, Mr Ayrton listened to some of the most 
striking evidence from the comptroller of the finances 
on the present state of local taxation in India. That 
evidence must have convinced him and every one who 
heard it that not only is the state of local taxation in 
India such as to excite our apprehension, but that it 
hangs over India at the present time like a threatening 
cloud, and is producing so much alarm and discontent 
that it is rapidly becoming our chief difficulty and 
danger in the government of that country. The last 
statement in the resolution I am about to move, 
that the financial condition of India must be regarded 
as unsatisfactory whilst the income-tax forms our only 
financial reserve, is entirely corroborated by the speech 
of the Under Secretary himself. He has admitted that 
the income-tax has been surrendered for political 
reasons. These political reasons have been so urgent 
that rather than continue the tax the surplus of 
revenue over expenditure is reduced to almost nothing; 
and yet he acknowledges that we have so entirely 
exhausted our financial resources in India that before 
ten years have elapsed it will in all probability be 
necessary again to impose the income-tax. Was there 
ever a more damaging confession? Talk about being 
the spokesman of financial panics ! Is it possible to 
give a more alarming description of a country than 
to say that in ten years it will be necessary to reimpose 
a tax which has now been surrendered, when the money 
which it yields is urgently wanted, because of the 



INDIAN FINANCE. II 51 

political dangers associated with its collection? Before 
proceeding to notice the figures of this year's budget 
it will not be out of place to make some remarks on 
the surrender of the income-tax. The House probably 
has not forgotten all that was said last year in favour 
of the tax by the ^very Government which is now 
obliged to relinquish it. We were then told that the 
tax was collected without difficulty and without abuse, 
and that it was the only way in which the wealthy 
were made to contribute their proper share to the 
State. Well, if all this was true, the surrender of the 
income-tax has been an act of the grossest financial 
injustice. Under all circumstances it is unjust to let 
the wealthy escape their proper share of taxation. • But 
in India this injustice is concentrated with maximum 
intensity, for in no country in the world is there pro- 
bably so great a gulf between the very wealthy and 
the poor. There are a few who are enormously rich. 
These, according to the Government, will now almost 
entirely escape taxation, whereas there is not to be the 
minutest fraction of diminution in the pressure of taxa- 
tion upon the great mass of the people, who, as I shall 
presently shew upon the highest authority, are so 
miserably poor that they can barely obtain subsistence, 
We must, therefore, come to the conclusion either that 
the Government has committed an act of injustice and 
folly in relinquishing the income-tax, or that the argu- 
ments which they put forward last year in defence of 
the tax were simply a tissue of fallacies and errors, 
We may accept the latter alternative as the one least 
humiliating to the Government ; we need not hesitate, 
moreover, to accept it as a true explanation of what 

4—2 



52 INDIAN FINANCE. II 

has taken place, when we discover that what was said 
last year in defence of the income-tax. was based upon 
such reckless and random assertions, that the Under 
Secretary, after declaring that he could bring forward 
five authorities in favour of the tax for one that could be 
brought forward by its opponents, was finally reduced 
to the pitiful expedient of resting his case upon the 
opinion of a single official and a native newspaper ; and 
the native newspaper took the earliest opportunity of 
stating that it had always opposed the tax, and that its 
opinions had been wholly misrepresented. This even- 
ing, however, the Under Secretary having more autho- 
rities at hand in favour of the tax when he has to 
explain its relinquishment, than he had when he was 
obliged to justify its continuance, assures us that a 
whole list of distinguished names might be quoted in 
favour of the tax. Further examination will, I believe, 
shew that all of those who are supposed to favour the 
tax have expressed the most decided opinion that the 
greatest possible mischief would result if there were 
frequent variations in the rate at which the tax was 
levied. These variations would of course take place if 
the income-tax became the only reserve from which 
deficiencies in the revenue had to be made up. Great 
stress has been laid by the Under Secretary upon what 
Lord Lawrence has said in favour of the tax. It is 
impossible for the Under Secretary to place a higher 
value upon the opinion of Lord Lawrence than I do. 
In the course of the remarks I am about to make I 
shall again and again appeal to the testimony of Lord 
Lawrence as the highest authority upon Indian ques- 
tions. But the Under Secretary, when referring to him 



INDIAN FINANCE. II 53 

as a supporter of the income-tax, forgot to tell the 
House that he spoke in terms of the severest con- 
demnation of such a tax if it were liable to frequent 
variations. Under such circumstances, he said, the tax 
would be unsuited to India, and would produce the 
greatest mischief. But in spite of all that is now said 
by the Under Secretary, to cover his retreat from the 
untenable position that he took up last year in defence 
of the income-tax, he knows perfectly well that in 
abandoning it the Governor General and the Secretary 
of State have come not only to a wise, but to a neces- 
sary decision. No statesman can commit an act of 
more mischievous pedantry than to assume that because 
a tax is adapted to one country it is equally suited to 
another country the social condition of which is entirely 
different. The Under Secretary has divulged the true 
state of the case when he has virtually admitted, that 
although it may be desirable to continue the income- 
tax in England, it has had for political reasons to be 
abandoned in India. The character of these reasons 
can be readily indicated. Again and again have we 
been told of the abuses connected with the levying of 
the income-tax in India, of the number of people who 
are wrongly assessed, of the oppression and extortion 
which result, and that consequently the tax produces 
an amount of annoyance to the people altogether dis- 
proportionate to the small revenue it yields. But it 
may be said, a blunder has no doubt been committed ; 
it has now, however, been repaired, and there can there- 
fore be no good in dwelling on the errors of the past. 
It would be quite superfluous to say a word about the 
past imposition of the income-tax if it had been abo- 



54 INDIAN FINANCE. II 

lished never to be imposed again, but the Under 
Secretary has himself confessed that ten years will not 
elapse before it will probably be again necessary to 
resort to the income-tax ; and I believe it will be easy to 
adduce conclusive reasons to shew that not only is the 
Under Secretary correct in this opinion, but that unless 
a fundamental change is at once introduced into the 
management of the finances of India, not ten years, 
no, not five years, will pass before a much more onerous 
income-tax will have to be imposed than has ever yet 
been levied in India. The House cannot too seriously 
consider the grave reflections which are suggested by 
such a financial situation, for it signifies that our chief 
reliance for raisins' extra revenue in India must be in a 
tax which has had to be abandoned for those political 
reasons to which reference has already been made, a 
tax which has been condemned in the most uncompro- 
mising terms by those who have been most specially 
concerned with the financial administration of India. 
I am anxious not to weary the House with an unneces- 
sary number of quotations, but I will direct its particu- 
lar attention to the following opinions which have been 
expressed by three successive Finance Ministers of 
India. Sir Charles Trevelyan resigned a position second 
only in importance to that of Governor General rather 
than be a party to the levying of the tax. Mr Laing 
has recently declared that "the income-tax is about 
as bad and obnoxious a mode of raising revenue as it 
is possible to imagine in a country like India." Mr 
Massey has gone so far as to affirm that "nothing on 
earth would induce him to hold office as Finance 
Minister if the condition imposed upon him by the 



INDIAN FINANCE. II 55 

Secretary of State were the maintenance of the income- 
tax as an ordinary source of revenue." And now I 
would ask the House, would any one be justified in 
remaining silent, if he believes that a tax which has 
been thus condemned will inevitably have to be re- 
imposed, and the danger which thus threatens India 
will be brought upon her, because her money is wasted 
in extravagance which can be avoided, and because her 
Government is so arranged that the administration of 
her finances can neither be efficient nor economical? 
But referring to the figures of the present year's 
Budget, which has this evening been laid before us, it 
may be thought that we ought at any rate at the pre- 
sent time to take a hopeful view of Indian finance. 
Not only does the experience of the past warn us that 
we ought to be very cautious in drawing conclusions 
from the figures of a single year's Budget, but I believe 
I shall be presently able to shew that associated with 
the figures which have been detailed to us by the 
Under Secretary, there is an amount of complexity 
and confusion the penetration of which would baffle the 
utmost financial ingenuity. Although the Under Secre- 
tary has described me as the spokesman of financial 
panics, yet unconsciously he has paid me so high a 
compliment that I feel I have now a more powerful 
incentive than ever to continue to devote as much atten- 
tion as possible to Indian affairs. We were reminded 
by the Under Secretary that during three years pre- 
vious to 1870 there had been deficits amounting to 
£6,299,216, and that during the last three years there 
had been surpluses to the amount of £4,725,836. 
It is somewhat significant that at the very time 



56 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

when the tide thus began to turn, at the very time 
when the Government was somewhat checked in their 
career of wanton extravagance, I was severely censured 
and contemptuously upbraided from the Treasury 
Bench for my presumption in endeavouring to do what 
little lay in my power to bring the pressure of public 
opinion to bear upon the Indian Government, and to 
direct the attention of this House to the critical posi- 
tion of Indian finance. Can there be any doubt that 
there would now be the same deficits as there were 
three years since, can there be any doubt that the 
Indian Government would be at the present moment 
spending just as much money as they were then, if 
this House did not take an increased interest in Indian 
questions, and if the Indian Finance Committee had 
not during the last three years exercised a constant 
watchfulness over Indian finance ? But now, returning 
to the figures of this year's Budget, I wi]l joroceed to 
shew why it is impossible to deduce from them any 
trustworthy conclusions as to the true financial position 
of India. Any one who has listened to the evidence 
given before the Finance Committee cannot fail to have 
been struck with the impenetrable confusion thrown 
over Indian finance by the perplexing distinction be- 
tween public works extraordinary and public works 
ordinary. Then again not the slightest reliance can 
be placed on any statement of revenue and expenditure 
whilst there are fluctuations in the cash balances of 
many millions a year. The cash balances rose in 
1870-1 from 16 millions to 20 millions, and in the next 
year to 24 millions ; they then suddenly sank to 20 
millions, and during the present financial year the 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 57 

Under Secretary has informed us the cash balances will 
be again reduced by more than four millions. Such un- 
accountable fluctuations afford an unbounded field for 
exploits of financial strategy. No one has ever been 
able to give an intelligible description of these cash 
balances. I believe the Prime Minister, great as is 
his mastery over finance, would be utterly baffled if he 
attempted to fathom the mystery. So far as any 
insight can be obtained into the subject, it appears 
that these cash balances are an omnium gatherum, com- 
posed partly of unexpended loans, of previous years' 
surpluses, and of unexhausted credits. This being the 
case, is it not obvious that when in one year the 
balances are reduced by more than four millions, a state- 
ment which shews, as this year's Budget does, a pre- 
tended balance of revenue over expenditure of £150,000, 
is not worth the paper on which it is printed ? The 
Under Secretary wishes us to believe that these four 
millions are going to be devoted to remunerative public 
works. These public works will not be finished in a 
single year; money will be required for them next 
year. The cash balances cannot be continually drawn 
upon. They are only a temporary resource. Unless 
therefore there is fresh borrowing, another large deficit 
is inevitable. Again I would ask, can the Under 
Secretary or any other official prove to the House that 
none of the money which is this year to be taken from 
the cash balances is to be devoted to the payment of 
ordinary current expenses ? and until this is shewn, 
can we feel the slightest confidence that the present 
year's surplus has not been manufactured by the 
simple process of devoting some portion of an un- 



58 INDIAN FINANCE. II 

expended loan to ordinary income ? We know what 
adepts Indian Financiers have become in the art of 
devoting capital to income. The Comptroller of the 
Finances has admitted that in one year, 1869-70, when 
a surplus was announced, this surplus had been ob- 
tained solely by this appropriation of capital to income, 
and in that year, if it had not been for this, there 
would have been a deficit of more than £500,000. 
Amongst other instances of appropriation of capital 
to income in that year, £427,000, representing accumu- 
lations arising from the sale of waste lands, appeared as 
an item of ordinary income. It had been specially en- 
acted that the money resulting from such sales should 
be employed as capital, either by being invested or in 
paying off debt. But so anxious was the Government 
of India to manufacture a surplus that this law, and in 
fact every other consideration that should influence 
prudent financiers or careful statesmen, were cast to the 
winds. Many as have been the strange disclosures made 
before the Indian Finance Committee during the last 
three years, nothing perhaps throws a more instructive 
light on the way in which Indian affairs are managed, 
than the confession made by official after official of this 
appropriation of capital to income. One official frankly 
admitted that in looking over Indian accounts, when- 
ever it is stated that the Government holds some 
fund, it may be almost invariably concluded that the 
money has long since been spent. The fund has dis- 
appeared, and the only memorial of its former existence 
is a debt of exactly equivalent amount. Lately, we 
have had in our own country what is known as the 
Post-Office scandal. Because the authorities in that 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 59 

Department have transferred a certain amount of 
capital from one department to another, the trans- 
action is considered so grave that an influential com- 
mittee of this House was at once appointed to investi- 
gate it. But if this transfer of capital is a scandal, who 
can suggest the name which will adequately character- 
ise the far more grave proceeding of appropriating capital 
to income, as has been done again and again in India ? 
It has been attempted to defend the proceeding by an 
argument which is essentially unsound. It is said that 
as the Indian Government has been habitually borrow- 
ing, and has moreover contracted loans in the very 
years in which these appropriations took place, no 
good would have been done by investing these funds, 
instead of appropriating them as income. But if there 
is one thing more certain than another in finance, it 
is that expenditure, and especially so when there is 
a tendency to extravagance, is in no small degree 
regulated by the amount of money which there is to 
spend. If it had been known in 1869-70 that instead 
of there being a surplus, as was announced, there was 
a considerable deficit, is it not more than probable that 
in order to make both ends meet, some extravagance 
might have been forbidden, some economy might have 
been enforced ? It has been necessary to make these 
precautionary remarks in order to prevent too implicit 
confidence being reposed in the figures of this year's 
Budget. But even admitting that there is no error in 
the accounts, that the stated revenue is the legitimate 
income of the year, that all that has been expended 
during the year has been fairly brought into this 
year's account, yet it is impossible for any of us to 



60 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

ascertain, — I doubt if the Secretary of State even 
knows himself — to what extent the comparatively 
favourable balance between revenue and expenditure in 
the present year is due to the sudden cessation of 
expenditure in various public works which have already 
been commenced, and which, on the one hand, cannot 
be abandoned without wasting the money already 
expended, and cannot, on the other hand, be sus- 
pended without adding greatly to then ultimate cost. 
Nothing- connected with the financial administration of 
India has been more conclusively demonstrated before 
the Indian Finance committee than the waste, mis- 
management, and extravagance which have character- 
ised the Public Works Department; and no circum- 
stance has more powerfully promoted this waste and 
extravagance than the impulsiveness with which public 
works have been undertaken, and the suddenness with 
which their construction has been suspended. The 
Under Secretary has advised the House carefully to 
read the evidence which has been lately given before 
the committee by Lord Lawrence. In all sincerity I 
will repeat that advice ; and I will venture to make 
one further suggestion, that the reading of the evidence 
of Lord Lawrence should be supplemented by an equally 
careful perusal of the evidence of Gen. Strachey, who, 
it must be remembered, was specially summoned by the 
Government as the witness most competent to defend 
the Public Works Department. Any one who reads 
his evidence must come to the conclusion that I have 
certainly not employed too strong language in saying 
that the Department has been characterised by waste, 
mismanagement, and extravagance. In order, however, 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 61 

to illustrate what has been done by this Department, 
I will direct the attention of the House to the following 
narrative, which is not an exceptional but a typical case, 
and every particular of which has been corroborated by 
official testimony. The Sangor barracks, after taking 
^ i years to erect, and costing £165,000, have lately 
been pronounced by an official committee to be so badly 
constructed and so unsafe that they will have to be 
abandoned. They have in fact never been occupied, 
and the £165,000 has consequently been absolutely 
wasted. The walls were so rotten that a walking-stick 
could be pushed into them. It is to be particularly 
remarked that the work was not done by contract, but 
was entirely undertaken by the Public Works Depart- 
ment. The House will be instructed and amused to 
hear the costly and complicated system of officialism 
that was brought into operation to achieve so notable 
a result. The Executive Engineer, who was apparently 
selected because he had not the slightest knowledge 
of masonry work, was assisted by an equally ignorant 
European subordinate, and was in charge of the works 
throughout their erection. Above the Executive En- 
gineer was placed a Superintending Engineer, and 
above him again was the Chief Engineer or local head 
of the Department. This Superintending Engineer 
paid only three visits to the works during their con- 
struction, and only wrote one Inspector's report, in 
which everything was described as going on satisfac- 
torily. The Chief Engineer only visited the works 
once, and no record of any report of his has been pre- 
served. Such management would bring ruin on any 
private business in six months, and yet this is the 



62 INDIAN FINANCE. II 

Department to which it is proposed to intrust the ex- 
penditure of 70 millions on State Railways and State 
Canals ! This is the Department which has lately been 
glorified by the Under Secretary as being likely to 
return to India with compound interest the benefit 
which Asia has in the past conferred upon Europe. 
The interest will indeed be compound. Enough has 
probably been said about this year's Budget to induce 
Honourable Members to exercise due caution in draw- 
ing too hasty conclusions as to the future of Indian 
finance from the expenditure and revenue of a single 
year. In order properly to estimate the true financial 
position of India, we must take a wider survey, and 
must carefully examine causes which are more perma- 
nent in their operation. Now the cardinal point on 
which I have before insisted, and which it is of the 
first importance to impress upon the House, is that 
whilst in England our revenue is far more elastic than 
our expenditure, in India, on the contrary, the expen- 
diture is far more elastic than the revenue. Many of 
the most important taxes in England yield far more 
than they did a few years since. The income-tax has 
increased in productiveness a hundred per cent, since 
it was first imposed by Sir Robert Peel. And since 
1850 the tea, sugar, and spirit duties, and many other 
important sources of revenue, have increased in pro- 
ductiveness from 60 to 100 per cent. Excessive there- 
fore as our expenditure has been, we are able at the 
same time to have an increased expenditure and a most 
important reduction in taxation. In India, on the con- 
trary, there is but a very slight natural increase in the 
most important sources of revenue. Two-fifths of the 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. G3 

entire revenue is yielded by the land, and the land- 
revenue has only increased 20 per cent, in 20 years. 
The salt duty does not increase in productiveness in 
a greater ratio. Excise and customs together only 
yield about £5,000,000, and the yearly increase is in- 
significant. This slowly-increasing revenue has to meet 
a rapidly increasing expenditure. Expenditure in India 
has increased at a greater rate than expenditure in our 
own country, where the revenue, to use the expression 
of the Prime Minister, has been advancing by " leaps 
and bounds." What is the inevitable result ? In 
England an increasing expenditure can be simulta- 
neously accompanied with a great reduction in taxation. 
The present Government having done little to reduce 
expenditure has been enabled to remit £9,000,000 
of taxation ; and although our expenditure is now 
£70,000,000, not only have no new taxes been im- 
posed since the time when the expenditure was only 
£50,000,000 a year, but a great number of taxes have 
been reduced or repealed which would now probably 
yield not less than £40,000,000 per annum. In India, 
on the contrary, the increase in expenditure which has 
for years been going on necessitates an increase of tax- 
ation, which, to quote the words of the late Lord Mayo, 
produces a wide-spread feeling of discontent from one 
end of that country to the other. But this is not all ; 
the contrast between England and India is not half 
exhausted ; it can be presented in another and a more 
striking light. A sudden increase in the expenditure 
of a nation may be brought about by so many different 
causes that it may at any moment be necessary to ob- 
tain a considerably additional revenue. These causes 



64 INDIAN FINANCE. II 

are so obvious that it is scarcely necessary to enumerate 
them. The breaking out of war largely adds to mili- 
tary expenditure ; India has a frontier war on an aver- 
age once in three years ; unpropitious seasons affect the 
revenue in two ways : existing taxes become less pro- 
ductive, and the Government may have to spend large 
sums in direct relief of the people. The revenue of 
India, from the fact that a large portion of it is derived 
from the land, is probably more liable to be influenced 
by unfavourable seasons than that of any other country. 
Again, a rise hi prices increases almost every item of 
expenditure except the interest on the public debt. 
This is of course a matter of no consequence if the 
items which compose the public revenue increase in 
the same ratio. A moment's consideration however 
shews that a rise in general prices would, so far as 
India is concerned, make a much greater addition to 
her expenditure than it would to her revenue. As pre- 
viously stated, two-fifths of her revenue is obtained 
entirely from the land. A considerable portion of this 
is for ever fixed in pecuniary amount, and much of the 
remainder is upon a 30 years' settlement, and therefore 
is only susceptible of an increase as the land gradually 
falls in for re-settlement. When it is remembered that 
the gold discoveries in Australia and California quad- 
rupled the supply of gold, when it is also remembered 
that the leading authorities agree that there has been 
a steadily marked rise in general prices, that this rise 
has not been less than 40 per cent, in India, and that 
experience has shewn that a considerable time has to 
elapse before the full effects of an increase in the sup- 
ply of the precious metals are felt; when these things 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 65) 

are remembered, can any one doubt that it is very pro- 
bable that there may be a very marked rise in prices 
in India during the next few years ? It therefore ap- 
pears that various circumstances may cause the ex- 
penditure in India to be much larger a few years hence 
than it is at the present moment. Is there any secu- 
rity that the great increase in expenditure that has 
been going on in India for the last 17 years will not 
continue in the future upon the same scale ? This 
being the case, I will earnestly ask the House to take 
into consideration what appears to me to be by far 
the most serious circumstance connected with the 
financial position of India. If it became necessary 
in our own country to raise 5, 10, or 20 millions of 
additional revenue, it could be done with comparative 
facility. The income-tax might be increased, and the 
duties on some articles of general consumption might 
be raised. If the nation thought that the extra ex- 
penditure was really required, the additional taxation 
would be readily borne, the stability of the Govern- 
ment would not be in the slightest degree weakened, 
and the prosperity of the country would be scarcely 
retarded. But if it suddenly became necessary to raise 
five millions of additional revenue in India, is there any 
one who has ever held an influential position in the 
Government of that country who can come forward 
and say that it could be obtained without resorting 
to an impost which has been abandoned, and without 
levying other taxation which would produce an amount 
of discontent that would make the boldest tremble 
for the security of our empire in India ? Again 
and again have I addressed the enquiry to those 
F. s. 5 



66 INDIAN FINANCE. II 

most competent to form an opinion :— -' How could 
.£5,000,000 of additional revenue be obtained in 
India ? " The answer invariably given is, " We know 
there is no way of doing it except by reimposing the 
income-tax, and by levying other taxation entirely 
unsuited to the people of India." Only a few weeks 
since I had an opportunity of questioning Lord Law- 
rence on this subject. No living man has had a longer 
or a more distinguished Indian career. He is perhaps 
by far the highest authority that can now be consulted 
on such a subject, for he is the only survivor of the 
illustrious men who have been Governors-General of 
India. After admitting the extent to which the land 
revenue is incapable of expansion, he was asked whe- 
ther there was any possibility of increasing the next 
important item of Indian revenue, viz. opium. He 
agreed that we obtain from opium at the present 
moment the utmost it is possible to obtain ; he further 
admitted that the Chinese, anxious to discourage the 
consumption of opium, had hitherto imposed various 
restrictions on its growth, but finding we were at any 
moment ready to go to war rather than be deprived 
of the opportunity of selling opium in China, he 
thought that the Government of that country was 
not unlikely to relinquish as perfectly hopeless all its 
attempts to check the consumption of opium ; it would 
then be freely grown in China ; this would of course 
greatly diminish the demand for Indian opium, and he 
therefore thought that the revenue which India ob- 
tained from opium was more likely to decrease than to 
increase. Let me here parenthetically remark, that this 
opium traffic is a striking instance of the moral example 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 67 

offered by Christian England to those whom the Arch- 
bishop lately called the heathen Hindoos. The Under 
Secretary has this evening hinted that the large re- 
venue yielded by opium shows how much we are 
befriended by Providence. Some will think that it 
rather shews how much another power, which I need 
not particularize, is on our side. With regard to 
the next important item of revenue, salt, Lord Law- 
rence said that under no circumstances whatever would 
he increase the salt duty ; he thought that it ought 
if possible to be reduced ; he described the great harm 
that was done to our rule in India by the present high 
rates of duty. It is difficult to make the people in the 
Punjaub believe that they derive great advantages 
from British rule when they see before them literally 
mountains of salt, not a handful of which they are 
allowed to take without paying this heavy duty, and 
when at the same time they know that if they just 
cross the frontier into a native state, they can get salt 
almost as freely as we in England get water. This 
opinion of Lord Lawrence is strikingly corroborated 
by the present Lieut. -Governor of Bengal, Sir George 
Campbell. I this evening received, through the cour- 
tesy of the Under Secretary, the last report of the 
moral and material progress of India, and one of the 
first passages I happened to read in it was a declara- 
tion of Sir G. Campbell, that he would rather have 
his right hand cut off than be* a party to the increase 
of the salt duty. In many parts of India it is certain, 
as stated by Lord Hobart, the present Governor of 
Madras,, that the salt duty has reached a point at 
which consumption is greatly checked. Thus an in- 

5—2 



68 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

crease of 18 per cent, in the duty in Madras Has only 
produced an increase of revenue of 12 per cent. With 
regard to customs, Lord Lawrence was doubtful whe- 
ther if these duties were increased any material addi- 
tion would be made to the very small revenue that 
they now yield. Nothing perhaps is a more striking 
feature of the condition of India than the small revenue 
of only £2,750,000 which is raised from customs. The 
mass of the people are so poor that no taxable foreign 
product is in general use. With regard to raising 
revenue from export duties, Lord Lawrence said that, 
theoretically, a considerable increase in revenue would 
be yielded by imposing an export duty upon various 
Indian products, such for instance as jute, and he 
thought that considering the peculiar circumstances 
of India, an export duty would be a good way of 
adding to her revenues : but then he went on to 
remark, practically, no reliance whatever can be placed 
on obtaining additional revenue from this source ; the 
Secretary of State is supreme in all financial questions, 
he is a member of a cabinet whose fortunes are scarcely 
affected by any considerations so trifling as what is 
likely most to promote the interests of India, but 
whose very existence may be at any moment ter- 
minated by a hostile vote of the commercial interest. 
Dundee and other manufacturing towns would oppose 
an export duty on jute, and their opposition would 
have far more weight *with an English cabinet than 
the recommendation of a Governor-General. Lord 
Lawrence having gone through the other items of 
revenue in India, came to the conclusion that if it 
was immediately necessary to obtain additional revenue, 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 69 

no existing tax could be increased, and no new tax 
except the income-tax could be imposed. One of the 
propositions in the resolution which I shall ask the 
House to affirm, viz. that the income-tax forms the 
only financial reserve in India, is therefore corroborated 
by the authority of one in whose opinion the Under 
Secretary particularly enjoins us to repose confidence. 
It is impossible to arrive at any result which will more 
plainly exhibit the critical nature of our financial posi- 
tion in India. But only a part of the story has yet 
been told. We are too prone to think that there 
are no financial questions in India to engage our 
attention but those connected with Imperial taxation. 
This erroneous idea is encouraged by the tone of offi- 
cial speeches in this House. Indian budgets have 
again and again been introduced without anything 
more than the most casual reference to local taxation. 
The Under Secretary would evidently this evening 
not even have alluded to the question, had he been 
simply making a Budget speech, and had he not 
thought it expedient to notice by anticipation the 
resolution which he knew was going to be moved. 
When we observe how the subject of local taxation 
is at the present time engaging the attention of this 
House, when its importance has at length become so 
generally recognized that it now occupies a foremost 
place in English politics, I hope, acting on the old 
adage, that a fellow-feeling makes us wondrous kind, 
we shall not forget that at the present moment local 
taxation is threatening the Indian people with a far 
greater amount of hardship and annoyance than it is 
ever likely to bring upon our own country. Here 



70 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

an increase of local expenditure leads to higher rates 
being imposed upon land, houses, and business pre- 
mises. This is hard enough to bear, but we have 
the satisfaction of knowing that there are limits with- 
in which the rate-collector must restrict his demands. 
He cannot lay hands upon our incomes ; he cannot 
impose countless restrictions upon trade, and cause 
every individual an indescribable amount of worry by 
making almost every article which is bought or sold 
subject to local taxation. All this which cannot hap- 
pen hi England has however to be borne in India. 
The Comptroller of the Finances admitted that in the 
towns of India there is not a single article of food, 
nor a single article of clothing, nor a single commodity 
which is of human use, which may not be rendered 
liable to local taxation by some recent legislation. 
There are octroi and transit duties ; cesses have been 
imposed upon the land for roads and education, an 
onerous house-tax has been levied ; and to such ter- 
rible straits was the Government of Bombay brought 
by a career of reckless and unprecedented extra- 
vagance, upon which I shall presently comment, that 
they were permitted to impose simply as a local im- 
post the worst and most oppressive income-tax that 
ever was devised by the perversity of man. The 
House will scarcely believe when I tell them, that 
this income-tax was imposed upon the very poorest 
class of labourers. Paupers could scarcely escape it, 
for incomes of £5 a year were made liable to it-. 
Could we in this country have a more convincing proof 
of misgovernment, than if in a time of peace our finan- 
cial exigencies became such that the income-tax had 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 71 

to be imposed upon the entire people, not even the 
labourer struggling for existence upon 10s. a week 
being permitted to escape % In order that you should 
adequately understand what has been going on in 
India, I will presently shew you that the very Go- 
vernment who are responsible for this monstrous tax, 
squandered the money thus wrung out of a miserable 
and impoverished population as lavishly and as heed- 
lessly as if it were water rained down from heaven. 
£150,000 expended in building a country-house for the 
Governor of Bombay; the expenses of his personal es- 
tablishment permitted in a few years to increase 360 per 
cent. ; nearly £2,000,000 expended in buying at par from 
certain influential persons a half-bankrupt scheme, the 
shares of which were, at the time the Government be- 
gan to negotiate the purchase, unsaleable at two-fifths 
the price the Government ultimately paid for them — 
these and many other transactions must be carefully 
considered, for until they are properly understood, it 
is impossible to form any estimate of the feelings that 
must be aroused in India by the increase not only of 
imperial but still more of local taxation. Onerous 
taxation may be submitted to when the necessities of 
the State require it, but it must inevitably generate 
the most serious discontent when it is in no small de- 
gree due to such acts of improvidence as those which 
have just been indicated. But as the House may 
think I have given an exaggerated description of the 
state of local taxation in India, I will direct the parti- 
cular attention of honourable members to the following 
description of the present grievous pressure of local 
taxation upon the people of Madras. The description 



72 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

is taken from the last Report of the Moral and Mate- 
rial Progress of India, which, as I have before said, 
has this evening been placed in my hands by the 
Under Secretary. "In Madras the local cesses are 
many and various. But what the people most feel and 
dread are the frequent changes. A ryot either has to 
pay, or is in imminent danger of having to pay, about 
a dozen different kinds of taxes and fees. There are 
the land, water, house, and income-taxes ; the road, 
irrigation and village service cesses: the education rate, 
the toll on roads, the octroi, the stamp duties, and 
registration fees. It is beginning to be felt, in this Pre- 
sidency, that some pledge ought to be given that there 
will be no further taxation for 30 years, except in case 
of war." In the face of such official statements as 
these, is it not trifling with the House to urge, as 
it has been this evening, that the amount levied in 
India from each individual in the form either of local 
or imperial taxation is in the aggregate small ? Thus 
the Under Secretary has told us that the entire amount 
raised by local taxation in India is only about three 
millions and a half, and he seems to think it particu- 
larly creditable to the Government that taxation in 
India, including the land revenue, imposes upon each 
inhabitant a charge of 3s. 1\d. But, in the first place, it 
must be remembered that it is difficult for us in this 
country to form any conception of the poverty of the 
Indian people. Lord Lawrence has stated that the 
great mass of the people are so poor that they can 
scarcely obtain the barest subsistence. In many parts 
of India the ordinary labourer does not earn more than 
3d. a day. It is often stated that wages have risen in 



INDIAN FINANCE. II 73 

India. But it can be shewn on the most conclusive 
evidence, that the rise in wages has not kept pace with 
the rise in price of the necessaries of life, and conse- 
quently the real remuneration of labour has diminished 
rather than increased. But the small amount yielded 
by the income-tax, and the comparatively small pro- 
duction of wealth in India will probably bring home to 
us with the greatest distinctness the almost incredible 
difference between the wealth of England and India. 
Although India is seven times more populous than our 
own country, yet an income-tax in India is only one- 
eleventh as productive as it is in England. This is 
shewn by the fact that an income-tax of one per cent., or 
about 2\d. in the £., yielded only about £500,000 in 
India, whereas a similar tax in England would yield 
more than £5,500,000. As therefore the income-tax is 
eleven times more productive in England than in India, 
while England is only one-seventh as populous, it would 
appear that England in proportion to its population is 
seventy-seven times more wealthy than India 1 . Let this 
be borne in mind when statistics are so confidently 
paraded to prove that taxation is not burdensome in 

1 As it has been said that the productiveness of the income-tax does 
not provide the fairest test for comparing the wealth of two countries, I 
thought it advisable in a subsequent part of the debate to make a compa- 
rison between the wealth of England and India from data supplied by the 
Under Secretary himself. It was stated by him two or three years since, 
when making his Budget speech, that the annual aggregate production of 
wealth in India was about £350,000,000, whereas the aggregate annual pro- 
duction of wealth in England was 2^ times greater than this. When there- 
fore the difference in the population of the two countries is taken into 
account, it follows that England in proportion to her population is, accord- 
ing to the calculation of the Under Secretary himself, about eighteen times 
wealthier than India. It would therefore appear that, accepting the Under 
Secretary's statistics of taxation, the people of India in proportion to their 
weakh are more heavily taxed than we are in England. 



74 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

India. But even if it could be proved — which I believe 
it cannot be — that the proportionate amount which is 
taken by taxation from a man's income is not larger in 
India than in England, yet there cannot be a greater 
fallacy than to suppose that taxation is not more onerous 
in the one country than in the other. Where the people 
are so miserably poor as they are in India, taxation, 
however light it may appear to be, is obtained by the 
people curtailing themselves of some necessary of life. 
In a wealthy country such as England, a large revenue 
can be raised by taxing luxuries which are consumed 
by the people. Five shillings taken from the man 
who has only £5 a year represents not only a much 
greater sacrifice, but causes much greater suffering 
than taking £5 from an income of £100 a year, 
although the percentage of the tax is in each instance 
the same. The mischief, moreover, produced by local 
taxation cannot in any respect be measured by the 
amount of taxation actually raised. The most serious 
charge to be brought against the present system is, that 
the extraordinary folly has been committed of giving 
legislative sanction to a host of taxes which have never 
been levied. What would be thought in our own 
country if an act were passed, before it was ascer- 
tained whether the money was or was not required, 
to impose taxes upon almost every kind of property 
and upon almost every article of daily use ? And yet, 
great as would be the folly of such a proceeding in 
England, it is a hundred times more indefensible in 
India, where the people are far more suspicious and far 
more easily alarmed. A great apparatus of local taxa- 
tion has been called into existence in India apparently 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 75 

with no better reason than to torment the people; 
for not only have many taxes which have been sanc- 
tioned never been levied, but Lord Northbrook has 
during the present year suspended the operation 
of a great part of the local taxation scheme. The 
question naturally suggests itself : — How has it come 
to pass that local taxation has been forced into so 
prominent a position in India during the last few 
years, that whereas nothing was heard about it in 
the days of the East India Company, it is now one 
of our chief difficulties and dangers in the govern- 
ment of that country ? Any one who takes the trouble 
to read the evidence that was given during the present 
session by the Comptroller of the Finances, will not 
only be able to answer this question, but will obtain 
an insight into one of the most extraordinary financial 
proceedings ever sanctioned by a Government. A few 
years since the Government of Lord Mayo — and no one 
has borne more willing testimony to the high character 
and personal worth of the late Governor-General than I 
have — driven into a corner to make both ends meet, hit 
upon a plan to which was given the somewhat plausible 
title of the decentralization scheme. This scheme, 
briefly explained, was simply the transfer of certain 
charges from imperial to local finance. Certain fixed 
grants from imperial funds were made to each local 
government to meet these charges, and any present 
or future deficit was to be made up out of local taxa- 
tion. It is to be particularly remarked that these 
charges were not only certain gradually to increase, 
but the grants were almost invariably, even in the 
first instance, less than had annually been expended 



76 INDIAN FINANCE. II 

up to that time. By this arrangement, therefore, local 
taxation had not only at once to bear a burden, but 
this burden is certain to increase in future years. By 
this device the imperial Government was relieved of 
about £350,000 per annum; but now let us inquire 
what has been the price which has been paid for this 
slight diminution in imperial expenditure. The price 
paid has been the passing of those various acts pre- 
viously described, by which almost every commodity 
used by the Indian people is rendered liable to local 
taxation. The price which has been paid for this de- 
lusive relief of the Government — which, it must be 
remembered, is no relief to the people in the way of 
any reduction of imperial taxation — is the creation of 
that alarm and dissatisfaction which has caused Lord 
Napier to declare, that " at no period of the British rule 
in India have we had so little hold upon the affections 
of the people." We, in this country, justly so much 
object to centralization, that some have been apt to 
think that the decentralization scheme in India has 
been as good a thing as decentralization is with us ; 
but on such a question there is no parallel between 
England and India. We object to centralization be- 
cause it weakens that principle of local self-government 
which has perhaps done more than anything else to 
make our people self-reliant and independent, and to 
cherish in them a love of liberty. In India, however, 
we permit the people to enjoy none of the advantages 
of local self-government. We allow them to have no 
representative institutions either local or imperial. The 
decentralization scheme has done nothing whatever to 
increase local self-government, but, on the contrary, the 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 77 

local taxes which it has necessitated have, more than 
any other taxation ever levied in India, been imposed 
in utter disregard of the wishes, the wants, and the 
habits of the people. One of the wisest statesmen who 
ever governed an Indian province, I refer to the late 
Sir Donald M c Cleod, who was not less distinguished for 
his skill as an administrator than for the affection he 
inspired in those over whom he ruled, repeatedly- 
warned us against not only the impolicy but the peril 
of imposing any new tax without first consulting the 
wishes of the people; and yet under this recent de- 
velopment of local taxation the people have been 
either burdened or alarmed with innumerable new 
taxes, and no more trouble has been taken to ascertain 
their opinions or to consult their habits, than if a 
complicated system of new imposts was being arranged 
for a country with which they had not the slightest 
connection. There is, however, another circumstance 
associated with this growth of local taxation to which 
I wish particularly to draw the attention of the House. 
The more the system is carried out of transferring 
charges from imperial to local finance, the more will 
the state of taxation in India be concealed from this 
House, and thus escape the criticism of public opinion. 
No one who has taken any trouble to ascertain the 
opinions prevalent among the Indian people can, I 
think, fail to arrive at the conclusion that they look to 
the English Parliament to redress their wrongs, and that 
they regard this House as the ultimate arbiter of their 
destinies. Without staying here to enquire whether 
the abolition of the East India Company has been so 
unmixed an advantage as it was at one time supposed 



78 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

to be, it cannot be doubted that since the time when 
that Company was for good or for ill abolished, the 
House of Commons is much more directly responsible 
for the government of India than it was before. I 
shall by and bye make some observations upon the 
connection which ought to exist between this House 
and India. It is, however, sufficient here to remark 
that the more information is kept from this House, the 
less likely is it that it will be able to discharge its 
responsibilities to India. There cannot be a more 
striking example of the extent to which the transfer of 
imperial charges to local funds will not only keep the 
English public but also this House ignorant of what is 
going on in India, than is afforded by the fact that, 
although the imperial income-tax in India was again 
and again referred to in this House, and numerous 
articles were written against it in the leading English 
newspapers, yet an act was passed to levy a far more 
burdensome income-tax in Bombay (for we have seen 
that it was to reach incomes of £5 a year, whereas all 
incomes below £100 a year were exempt from the im- 
perial income-tax) ; and at the same time this local 
income-tax scarcely attracted any attention at all in 
this country; it was for a long time unnoticed in this 
House, and scarcely any reference was made to it by 
the English press. Before leaving the subject of local 
taxation, it is necessary to shew what an unfavourable 
position the Government must occupy in the eyes of 
the people, by constantly resorting to cesses or rates 
upon land. I am not now referring to the point that 
has been so keenly disputed in India, viz. whether 
under the permanent settlement the Government is 



INDIAN FINANCE. It 79 

legally entitled to these cesses upon land ; I am refer- 
ring to the case of the thirty years' settlement, where it 
seems to be much more difficult to defend these cesses 
upon land. My honourable friend, the Member for 
Gravesend (Sir C. Wingfield), who for many years was 
engaged in arranging the land settlement of Oude, will 
tell you that the most distinct promise was given, that 
those who took land upon this thirty years' lease should 
pay as revenue 51-| per cent, of the produce, and that 
under no circumstances whatever should the demands 
of the Government exceed this percentage. We have 
his authority for saying that no promise could have 
been given in more explicit language, and every pains 
was taken at the time to make the people believe that 
the promise would be carried out, not only in its letter 
but in its spirit. I ask you to consider the feelings 
that must be entertained towards the Government 
when the people find that, in spite of this promise, the 
Government takes not 51 -J per cent., but 52 J per cent, 
of the produce of the land, in consequence of the- new 
cesses that have been recently imposed. The decen- 
tralization scheme was proposed just at the time when 
the public works mania was at its highest ; and a pro- 
position was actually sanctioned by the Government of 
India to make irrigation canals in the Punjaub, and if 
these canals did not pay 7 per cent, the cultivators of 
the land in the neighbourhood were to be charged for 
the water, whether they used it or not. Do not 
suppose that no harm has been done because this com- 
pulsory irrigation-rate was never actually levied. It is 
impossible adequately to estimate the alarm and irri- 
tation which the proposal created ; in fact, as if it were 



80 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

not enough greatly to increase local taxation, those who 
were responsible for the Government of India acted as 
if they were desirous to produce the maximum amount 
of harm and annoyance : for not only were the people 
burdened with new taxes, but they were constantly 
reminded that they might at any moment be made the 
victims of numberless other vexatious imposts which 
were kept in reserve. There is much else which I 
should like to say on the question of local taxation, 
but I cannot help thinking, without entering farther 
into the subject, that the House will agree with the 
2nd proposition in the resolution I am about to move, 
viz. That the state of local taxation in India should 
be viewed with apprehension. But it may be asked, 
If there is so much to censure in the present adminis- 
tration of the finances of India, what are the remedies 
that you are prepared to suggest? It is not sufficient 
simply to make complaints and to point out short- 
comings, the government of so vast a country as India 
is one of the most difficult tasks that ever has been 
undertaken ; it is so difficult that mistakes are certain 
to be committed, and imperfections are certain to exist. 
Those therefore who find fault are bound to shew that 
under a different system there would be a better admi- 
nistration, there would be less extravagance, fewer 
errors and fewer shortcomings. All this I fully admit, 
and in attempting to point out in what manner I 
believe the administration of India may be improved, 
do not think I am so presumptuous as for one moment 
to suppose that it is possible for me to suggest a com- 
plete solution of the problem. I am fully conscious 
that there are those in this House who, if they give 



INDIAN FINANCE. II 81 

adequate attention to the subject, would be able to 
render much more assistance to the complete solution 
of this problem than I shall ever be able to do. I make 
no other promise than to shew how some of the defects 
in the present system of governing India may be 
removed. It is very important for the House to bear 
in mind the salient features in the administration of 
India. All the officials in India, including the Go- 
vernors of Madras and Bombay, are nominally the 
subordinates of the Governor General. I say nomi- 
nally, because the power which is possessed, or perhaps 
more properly speaking, assumed, by the Governors of 
Bombay and Madras to communicate directly with the 
Secretary of State in Council, makes them in many 
respects independent of the Governor General. As Lord 
Lawrence admitted there thus arises an imperiani in 
imperio. This is fatal to due administrative control, 
and to this circumstance may in no small degree be 
traced the extravagance which has characterised the 
Government of Bombay. The Governor General and 
the Secretary of State in Council are in many respects 
equal in position and authority. When, however, the 
Government of India was reconstituted upon the abo- 
lition of the East India Company, it was intended that 
the Secretary of State should be supreme in all ques- 
tions of finance. He undoubtedly has the power to 
overrule the Governor General on any financial ques- 
tion, and nothing has been done directly to lessen the 
power originally conferred upon the Secretary of State 
in Council in reference to finance. But although 
nothing has been done directly, it was soon found 
that the Secretary of State, in consequence of his rela- 
f. s. 6 



82 INDIAN FINANCE. II 

tions with the English Government, did not exercise 
so complete a control over Indian expenditure as it 
was intended he should do ; and this control has been 
reduced almost to a minimum with regard to military 
expenditure, in consequence of the amalgamation of 
the Indian with the British army. The considerations 
suggested by this diminution in the control over the 
finances of India exercised by the minister responsible 
to Parliament, will bring out into strong relief many of 
the gravest defects in the present constitution of the 
Government of that country. It is in the first place 
obvious that the expenditure of India is in a very great 
degree influenced by the British Government. For 
instance, many charges have to be jointly borne by the 
two countries. If a certain amount has to be con- 
tributed, the question then arises, — What portion of 
this amount shall be borne by each country? The 
point upon which I wish particularly to insist is this : 
that whereas in the days of the East India Company 
India was in a position to secure for herself fair treat- 
ment in the arrangement of such a bargain, she has 
had, on the contrary, no reasonable chance of obtaining 
fair treatment since the Government of that country 
has been transferred from the East India Company to 
the Crown. This assertion is not only proved by the 
testimony of those most competent to form an opinion 
on the subject, but it shall be abundantly verified by 
specific examples. A host of witnesses have testified 
to the well-known fact that as the East India Com- 
pany was one of the most powerful corporations, and as 
it possessed great parliamentary influence, it was able 
to offer effectual resistance if the British Government 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 83 

ventured to make any unjust demands upon the 
revenues of India. The East India Company, having 
a direct personal interest in the finances of India, was 
bound by the most potent of all motives to exercise 
a constant and zealous watchfulness over her finances. 
Under the existing system we cannot feel the slightest 
security that any one will exercise the same watchful- 
ness. This indicates the great distinction between 
the past and the present, and it will not be difficult to 
shew that it affords an explanation of the fact that 
whereas the administration of the finances of India was 
formerly distinguished by the most remarkable fru- 
gality, it is now characterised by the most reckless ex- 
travagance. There is now no guarantee whatever that 
if a question is brought forward affecting India, there 
will be any one in this House to represent her interests. 
As representatives of English constituencies, we are, of 
course, supposed to care first for England, and secondly, 
for India. But perhaps it will be said, " India is repre- 
sented in Parliament by two officials, the Secretary of 
State and the Under Secretary of State." But even 
if it is conceded that these officials are in no way 
wanting in ability or zeal, it still follows, from the nature 
of the case, that the protection which they are able to 
give to India, when any question arises suggesting a 
conflict of interest between her and England, must be 
of the most flimsy and worthless kind. In the first 
place we may ask: — "From whom do they derive their 
power?" "Who confers upon them their offices?" 
Not India, but England. It is the case of an arbitra- 
tion between two disputants. What chance will there 
be of securing fair treatment if one of the parties in 

6—2 



84 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

the dispute not only appoints both the arbitrators, 
but can dismiss them both at pleasure ? The Under 
Secretary for India is simply a subordinate under the 
Cabinet, who can be dismissed at an hour's notice if 
he is too officious to his superiors, or, in other words, 
is too solicitous to do his duty to India. The Secretary 
of State for India is simply a member of a Cabinet 
whose existence depends upon the votes of an assembly 
in which India has no representation at all. If any 
financial arrangement between England and India has 
finally to be settled by the English Cabinet, not only 
has England 15 times more representation than India, 
but the whole Cabinet primarily derives its power from 
an assembly in which India has no voice. Hon. Mem- 
bers are no doubt aware that at the time when it was 
proposed to transfer the Government of India to the 
Crown, it was foreseen by many most competent to 
judge, that India would suffer in the manner just de- 
scribed from the loss of that power and influence which 
the East India Company could exercise on her behalf. 
Few men had greater official experience of Indian affairs 
than the late Mr J. S. Mill, and when it was proposed 
to abolish the East India Company, he emphatically 
warned us in what was justly described, I believe by 
the Times, as one of the ablest state papers ever 
written, that an incalculable injury would be inflicted 
on India, if nothing was done to bring into existence 
some influence which would constitute for India a pro- 
tection similar to that which she derived from the 
East India Company. It was no doubt chiefly with 
the view of securing this object that the Council of 
the Secretary of State was appointed. It was sup- 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 85 

posed that a body of gentlemen many of whom had 
spent a great portion of their lives in India, either in 
official positions or in mercantile pursuits, and the 
tenure of whose offices was to be unaffected by a 
change of the English Government, — it was supposed, 
I say, that such a Council, being at least as much in- 
terested in India as in England, and being bound to 
the former country by the ties of association, would 
be able to give to India most powerful and efficient 
protection whenever her interest required it. Great 
power was undoubtedly conferred upon this Council, 
for the Secretary of State cannot sanction any expen- 
diture of Indian revenues unless he obtains the sanc- 
tion of a majority of his Council. Nothing is farther 
from my intention than to say a single word in dis- 
paragement of the individual members of the Council. 
No one can deny that there have always been many 
members of the Council of the highest ability, who, in 
distinguished official careers in India, have rendered 
the greatest service to that country. Although as 
ready as any one can be to admit all this, it seems 
to me impossible to resist the conclusion that the 
Council in its actual working has not secured for India 
the advantages which were anticipated. The causes 
which have contributed to this result are various. In 
attempting to describe some of them, I am perfectly 
well aware that I am speaking on a subject so delicate 
and difficult, that I shall be very careful not to make 
any statement which cannot be supported by the 
opinions of those whose testimony is entitled to the 
greatest respect. On this particular question no one 
can speak with greater authority than Lord Lawrence, 



86 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

for not only has he been Governor General, but after 
having served for 32 years in India he was appointed 
to the Council on his return to England. On being 
questioned as to how it happens that India so generally 
fails to obtain justice in her pecuniary relations with 
England, he said the Secretary of State could offer no 
effectual resistance, because he was overborne by poli- 
tical pressure. But how is it that the Council does 
not come to the aid of the Secretary of State ? No 
charge can be thrown upon India without their consent. 
Why do they not strengthen his hands in resisting 
political pressure ? Why do they not compel him to 
struggle against it? They might say: "We hold our 
present appointments to protect the interests of India; 
we receive our salaries from her revenues. By every 
obligation that a sacred trust can impose we are bound 
to protect her interests. No power on earth shall 
induce us to sanction what we know to be an injustice 
to her." Lord Lawrence hinted that a Council acting 
thus would be dismissed by the Government. All that 
I can say is, that if any Government were to attempt 
to do such a thing, and if they were not instantaneously 
displaced from power by a vote of this House, all sense 
of the duty which we owe as a nation to the great 
dependency we have taken upon ourselves to rule, 
would be so utterly dead, that the continuance of our 
Empire in the East could bring nothing but disgrace 
on ourselves, and misfortune upon the Indian people. 
It would of course be unjust to imply that the Council 
never offer any resistance to the political pressure 
which exercises such a potent influence on the Secre- 
tary of State, but example after example might be 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 87 

quoted to prove that in this respect the Council has 
grievously disappointed the expectations of those who 
advocated its creation. One of the most experienced 
officials at the India Office has declared that India 
almost invariably fails to obtain justice when the in- 
terests of England and India are supposed to come into 
conflict. Sir Charles Trevelyan has stated that since 
the transfer of the Government of India to the Crown, 
India has again and again had to bear charges which 
not only would never have been submitted to, but 
which the British Government would never have at- 
tempted to impose upon her in the days of the East 
India Company. Sir Charles Trevelyan is able to 
speak on this subject with an authority possessed 
probably by no other man, because after having been 
for many years in the service of the East India Com- 
pany, he became Permanent Secretary to the Treasury, 
and subsequently occupied an important position in 
India, after the East India Company had been abolished. 
He therefore is practically acquainted with the two 
systems of governing India, and when he was Per- 
manent Secretary of the Treasury, he was in the 
very department which is specially concerned with 
the adjustment of the financial relations between 
England and India. In order completely to sub- 
stantiate the point on which I have been insisting, 
it will be only necessary to mention a few of the 
numerous instances in which England has unjustly 
thrown some pecuniary charge on India. Striking 
official evidence has been given in reference to the 
treatment of India in regard to the Red Sea Tele- 
graph and the Alexandria and Malta Telegraph. 



88 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

Although India was in no way responsible for the 
Abyssinian War, a considerable portion of the troops 
engaged in that war were paid for by her. When 
the Duke of Edinburgh visited India, the cost of the 
presents which! he distributed was not only made 
a charge upon Indian revenues, but India was also 
made to pay the expenses of his travelling companions 
from England. When he visited Australia, what 
would the Australian people have thought if England 
had attempted to impose a similar charge upon them ? 
Why we perfectly well know that we should not for 
one moment have even thought of doing such a 
thing. Is it wise, is it dignified for a great and 
wealthy country to practise extortions upon those who 
have no power to resist ? It may of course be said, 
that these transactions only represent small items of 
charge. This is no palliation, but is rather an aggra- 
vation of our conduct. The smaller the sum the more 
contemptible does the affair appear. If a wealthy 
person does some act of paltry meanness, is a poorer 
person who suffers from the meanness likely to be 
better pleased because he is told that it was only a 
question of sixpence ? I have no hesitation in saying 
that it is impossible to exaggerate the harm that these 
and similar transactions have done to our rule in India. 
Errors intrinsically of far greater importance have not 
produced a tithe part so much irritation and dissatis- 
faction. It must not, however, be supposed, that in 
speaking of the financial relations between England 
and India trifling amounts such as those to which 
reference has just been made are alone in question. 
When we consider the numerous extravagant and un- 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 89 

remunerative undertakings which have been forced 
upon India by the pressure of the English commercial 
interest, and when we also consider the ruinous mili- 
tary charges which India has to bear in consequence of 
the policy adopted towards her by the War Office and 
the Horse Guards, it will soon be found that we are 
not dealing with unimportant items of a few thousand 
pounds, but that amounts are in question which are 
sufficient to produce no small part of the financial 
embarrassment under which during the last few years 
India has suffered. Upon the Godavery Navigation, 
a favourite scheme of the cotton interest in England, 
three quarters of a million has been spent with so 
little result that it has been officially reported that 
the works had better not be continued. The Orissa 
Irrigation Works were bought from an English Com- 
pany at £450,000 beyond the value of the shares as 
quoted at the time. The Madras Irrigation Works, 
with an influential English directorate, obtained from 
the Secretary of State of the day a guarantee upon 
£1,600,000, and the scheme does not yield a shilling 
of profit. The Scinde, Punjaub and Delhi Bail way 
was also constructed by an English Company. Five 
per cent, was guaranteed upon all the capital which 
has been spent and wasted. More than £8,000,000 
have already been expended. The line only pays 
125. 6d. per cent., and there seems to be no prospect 
of its returns increasing. I will not weary the House 
with the repetition of instances of similar recklessness 
and prodigality. The promoters of these Companies 
are in the happy position of being able on a magnificent 
scale to play at the game of "heads I win, tails you 



90 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

lose." Disastrous as these schemes have been to India, 
the gains of the shareholders are secured. In this 
day's money market you will see that the Madras 
Irrigation Works are at 4 premium, the Scinde, Pun- 
jaub and Delhi shares are at 8 premium. I will next 
describe, as briefly as the nature of the subject admits, 
the extent to which the military expenditure of India 
is increased by the War Office and the Horse Guards. 
There is not, I will venture to say, a single person who 
has taken any trouble to acquaint himself with the 
subject who will not agree in the opinion that the 
military expenditure of India has been most seriously 
increased by the amalgamation of the Indian with 
the British army. The amount of this increase is 
certainly not less than £1,000,000 a year; many com- 
petent judges estimate it at considerably more than 
£2,000,000 a year. Since 1862 the army has been 
diminished by 12,000 Europeans, and by 16,000 na- 
tives, and yet this smaller army costs about £1,500,000 
more, after allowing for the transfer of certain charges, 
than the larger army in 1862. Two years since a 
blue-book was published containing correspondence 
between the government of Lord Mayo and the Secre- 
tary of State in reference to the military expenditure 
of India. This correspondence brings out with re- 
markable distinctness the all-important fact that the 
Secretary of State in all questions of Indian military ex- 
penditure is bound hand and foot by the Horse Guards 
and the War Office. Sir Henry Durand, whose untimely 
death inflicted irreparable loss upon India, addressed, 
as military member of the Viceroy's Council, to the 
Secretary of State, one of the ablest minutes that was 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 91 

ever written. Sir Henry Durand, after pointing out 
in what way many large reductions might be made 
in military expenditure, demonstrates with the utmost 
clearness that these reductions might be effected with- 
out in the slightest degree diminishing the efficiency 
of the Indian army. He shews how desirable it is 
that the number of regiments should be reduced, that 
at the same time the numerical strength of the re- 
mainder should be increased. In this way he proves 
that there would be a great saving in the present 
enormous expenditure upon officers, whilst at the same 
time India would be able to bring as powerful an army 
into the field. Amongst other reductions, he advises 
a large saving in the Artillery, and he particularly 
insists on the fact that much unnecessary expenditure 
has been forced upon India simply by the dictum 
of the Horse Guards. This minute of Sir H. Durand 
cannot apparently be acted upon by the Secretary of 
State for India, but is communicated to the Horse 
Guards. The reception it there receives is most sig- 
nificant and noteworthy. " Not the slightest notice 
is taken of many of Sir H. Durand's recommendations, 
and those to which the Horse Guards condescend to 
pay any attention are considered not from the Indian, 
but solely from the English point of view. Again 
and again does it appear that a particular proposal 
cannot be assented to, or a suggested economy cannot 
be sanctioned, not because it would not be a good 
thing for India, not because it would not effect an 
important diminution in expenditure, but because it 
would not suit the convenience of the military autho- 
rities in England, or because it would entail some 



92 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

additional charge upon English estimates. At the 
present time 450 officers maintained by India have 
nothing whatever to do, and it is admitted that her 
army is over- officered, but the excuse made for this 
redundancy of officers is that it is an essential part 
of the English military system. Too much stress can- 
not be laid upon the fundamental distinction already 
pointed out between the financial position of the two 
countries. If England chooses to waste £1,000,000 
a year in the employment of an unnecessary number of 
officers, her revenue is so prosperous and elastic that 
the waste is a matter of comparatively little conse- 
quence. A million, however, wasted in India may 
necessitate the imposition of some tax so objectionable 
(the income-tax was last year levied to get £500,000) 
that discontent may be produced from one end of that 
country to the other. Time prevents me referring at 
greater length to the correspondence, of which Sir H. 
Durand's minute forms a part. Every page of it 
should be carefully read by those who wish to know 
how difficult it is to make both ends meet in India. 
For instance, it throws an instructive light upon the 
establishment of the staff corps. It will be some day 
scarcely believed that a military corps should have 
existed w T hich a man can enter after serving three 
years as a subaltern in the army. Having once 
entered it, he may be employed the rest of his life 
in civil work. Although he may never be occupied 
one single hour in military duties, he ultimately 
obtains the rank of Major- General, and secures a 
Colonel's allowance of £1,100 a year as a retiring pen- 
sion. This civilian Major -General may suddenly be 



INDIAN FINANCE. II 93 

called upon to discharge in the field the duties belong- 
ing to his military rank. It has been calculated that 
more than a million a year of the revenues of India 
is wasted by the system adopted in granting these 
pensions. About five years since, Lord Mayo and 
the highest military authorities in India, including 
Lord Sandhurst and General Norman, prepared a 
scheme for reducing the serious charge which the pen- 
sions in the Staff Corps entail. It was submitted to 
the present Secretary of State, only to be curtly and 
summarily rejected by him. There is one other branch 
of Indian military expenditure upon which I must say 
a few words, as it shews in a striking manner some of 
the radical defects in the present system of governing 
India. Secretaries of State, Governors-General, every 
authority at the India Office, every official in India, 
have been all alike impressed with the conviction that 
India is compelled by the English military authorities 
to pay a most excessive price for her recruits. It has 
been proved by the most conclusive evidence that if 
India could supply recruits for herself from England, 
she would obtain them at least at one-third less than 
the price she is now forced to pay. Remonstrance 
after remonstrance has been addressed to the Horse 
Guards and the War Office, with about as much effect 
as if blank sheets of paper had been sent to them. 
General Pears, the Military Secretary at the India 
Office, stated in his evidence that the last communica- 
tion on the subject had been sent to the Horse Guards 
six months previously, but they had not even vouch- 
safed to return an answer. It cannot, however, be 
necessary to multiply instances. More than enough, 



94 INDIAN FINANCE. II 

I am confident, has already been said to convince the 
House that the Secretary of State and his Council 
either cannot or will not protect the Indian Exchequer 
against demands which are improperly made upon it 
either by the English public or by the English Govern- 
ment. This being the case, the important question 
arises, — Can any remedies be suggested, and if so, 
what are they ? Some have proposed that the Indian 
Council should be abolished. Certainly if it does no 
more in the future than it has done in the past, it will 
be difficult to justify its continuance. But there 
are many reasons which ought to make one pause 
.before advocating the adoption of such a proposal. It 
is evident, after what has been stated, that it is very 
desirable if possible to strengthen the hands of the 
Secretary of State. The Council, if they fully used 
the power placed in their hands, could not only give 
the Secretary of State this additional power, but could 
compel him to see that justice was done to India, if he 
cared less about her interests than he did about the 
party interests of the Cabinet of which he is a member. 
After considering various suggestions that have been 
made for altering the present constitution of the Coun- 
cil, I have come to the conclusion that great advantage 
would result if the proceedings of the Council were 
made public. Not only the Council, but the Secretary 
of State and the Government of which he is a member, 
would be brought more directly under the influence of 
public opinion, and any neglect of duty would then 
be readily detected. The Council would also be 
encouraged to take more interest in their work. It 
now often happens that some of the most eminent mem- 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 95 

bers of the Council object to something that is being 
done. They are overruled, and the only action they 
can take in the matter is to write elaborate protests, 
which long after the affair has been irrevocably settled 
are laid on the table of this House. Their opposition, 
however, might prove effectual if their objections 
could be known in time. Something is at this moment 
happening at the India Office which affords a striking 
example of the advantage which would result from 
publishing the proceedings of the Council. The Secre- 
tary of State is being eagerly pressed, by the same 
persons who had influence enough with the Govern- 
ment to secure the purchase of the Elphinstone Land 
Scheme at a ruinous price, to make a State railway 
from Curwar, at a cost of not less than £1,000,000. 
I believe I am perfectly correct when I state that 
this scheme is strongly objected to by several mem- 
bers of the Council, whose opinion is particularly en- 
titled to respect. If the reasons for their opposition 
were published, and if at the same time certain particu- 
lars connected with the history of this railway pro- 
ject were made known to the House, I am confident 
that no Secretary of State in the present position of 
Indian finance would venture to give his sanction to 
the scheme. It may of course be said, that the pub- 
lication of the proceedings of the Council would 
encourage this House to meddle too much with Indian 
administration. On the contrary, however, it may be 
urged that the interference of this House would be 
more systematized and placed on a more reasonable 
basis. Under the present system the interposition of 
this House in Indian affairs must necessarily be un- 



96 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

certain and accidental. Sometimes we interfere when 
we have not the requisite knowledge to do so ; more 
frequently things that are being done in connection 
with India escape the attention of this House, when 
a discussion would be of the utmost value. It can 
scarcely be denied that the intervention of this House 
would not only be justified, but would almost invari- 
ably be advantageous when anything is being done 
in reference to India which provokes strong protests 
from influential members of the Council. It will not 
improbably be said, " but Parliament has in the past 
often intervened not for the benefit of India." The 
questions which have been most frequently discussed 
in this House have been proposals to give some In- 
dian prince a pension out of the revenues of India. 
This House has often shewn itself more solicitous to 
promote the interest of some classes of Englishmen 
than to protect the taxpayers of India. When the 
Bill for the amalgamation of the Indian and British 
armies was passing through Parliament, a clause was 
inserted in the interest of the British officers, which 
throws a heavy and unnecessary charge upon India. 
No one can be more ready fully to admit these short- 
comings than I am. It is because I have been so 
much impressed with them that I have endeavoured 
to do what I can to point out the responsibility which 
we, as members of this House, owe to India. There 
is nothing more strongly impressed upon my mind 
than that if we continue in the future to be as neg- 
ligent of this responsibility as we have been in the 
past, we shall some day incur the reproach of having 
brought upon our country one of the most serious 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 97 

misfortunes from which she has ever suffered. Depend 
upon it, the conduct of the British Parliament will 
in no small degree decide the future of our empire 
in India. 

I will now in conclusion briefly consider certain 
reforms of the present method of government which 
may be carried out in India itself. No one, so far 
as I am able to discover, is prepared to justify the 
present constitution of the Governments of Bombay 
and Madras. If the Punjaub, the North-West Pro- 
vinces and Oude can be administered by Lieutenant- 
Governors or Commissioners, why should a different 
and more costly system be necessary in Bombay and 
Madras? The North- West Provinces are more than 
twice as populous as the Presidency of Bombay. The 
former has a population of 30,778,000, the latter of 
only 14,000,000. The Lieutenant-Governors are ap- 
pointed by the Viceroy, and he invariably selects some 
distinguished Indian official. The Governors of Bom- 
bay and Madras are appointed by the Secretary of 
State, and the selections which he makes often afford 
additional proof that the Secretary of State is pri- 
marily a member of an English Government, and only 
secondarily the minister for India. He not unfre- 
quently selects men for political reasons. Sometimes a 
place has to be found for a troublesome and unpopular 
ally, sometimes a man who has been faithful to his party 
has to be provided for. Sometimes social and other 
claims have to be considered. And thus has it often 
happened that men have been appointed to the Go- 
vernorships of Bombay and Madras who, as far as the 
world knows, have never given one hour's attention to 
F. s. 7 



98 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

Indian affairs. These Governors are supposed to hold a 
higher position than the Lieutenant-Governors. They 
receive much higher salaries, and are surrounded with 
expensive establishments. The Governor of Bombay 
has two palaces in Bombay, and a country house at 
Poonah, which was lately erected at a cost of £155,000, 
£20,000 more being spent in furnishing it. India has 
to pay £26,000 per annum for his personal establish- 
ment, £1,700 a year for his band, £1,200 a year for his 
state barge. It is as inconceivable that a Lieutenant- 
Governor would be permitted to launch out into such 
extravagance, as it is that this House would pay 
£1,700 a year in providing a band for the Prime Mi- 
nister. This kind of personal extravagance is however 
only a small part of the evil. 

Because Bombay and Madras have each a Governor, 
it seems to be thought that they must each have an 
army with its Commander-in-Chief. Lord Sandhurst, 
Sir H. Durand, and a host of other high military 
authorities who might be quoted, have repeatedly 
declared that these separate armies greatly increase 
military expenditure, and they further assert that this 
additional charge is not only useless, but absolutely 
injurious. The greatest evil, however, resulting from 
the present constitution of the Governments of Bombay 
and Madras is due to a circumstance to which allu- 
sion has already been made. From the fact that the 
Governors are appointed by the Secretary of State 
and not by the Viceroy, they are to a certain extent 
independent of the Viceroy. If he disapproves of any 
of their proceedings, they immediately put themselves 
into communication with the Secretary of State, who 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 99 

very possibly may be a former political colleague. 
There thus arises an imperium in imperio, under which, 
as has been stated, it is impossible to exercise efficient 
control. More than one official witness, on being 
questioned upon the unprecedented extravagance which 
has characterized the government of Bombay, signifi- 
cantly said, "the Governor took the bit into his mouth 
and no power could get it out again." One example, 
however, will perhaps more forcibly impress the House 
than any amount of general description. The circum- 
stances I am about to describe happened under the 
Viceroyalty of Lord Lawrence, and he testified to the 
accuracy of the following narrative. In 1865 the 
Governor of Bombay, without obtaining the consent 
of the Viceroy, sold a country house at Poonah for 
£35,000. Upon being censured for this act of insub- 
ordination by the Viceroy, he pleaded in excuse that 
the bargain was so good that he should be able to 
build a new and much better house with the money 
for which the old one was sold. Consent accordingly 
was given to the building of the house on the under- 
standing that it was not to cost more than this 
£35,000. Eighteen months elapse, and the Viceroy 
discovers that not £35,000 but £90,000 has been spent, 
and the house is not nearly completed. He then 
once more with redoubled severity censures the Go- 
vernor of Bombay, and orders him at once to furnish 
an estimate of the amount required to complete the 
building. Instead of furnishing this estimate, the 
Governor puts himself into communication with the 
Secretary of State, and before the Viceroy obtains 
the estimate another £60,000 has been spent. A 

7—2 



100 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

house upon which only £35,000 was to be expended, 
costs £155,000, and in order aptly to complete this 
narrative of prodigality and insubordination, £20,000 
is ultimately given to the Governor to furnish the 
house 1 . Is not a system of Government under which 
such things are possible conclusively condemned 1 If 
time permitted me I believe it would be easy to shew 
by a simple statistical statement, that if Bombay and 
Madras had been in recent years administered as eco- 
nomically as the Punjaub and Oudh, the income-tax 
need not have been imposed, the decentralization 
scheme would never have been heard of, and the 
present local taxation difficulty would scarcely have 
been known. 

It is of course scarcely necessary to say that in 
considering how the Government can be reformed, no 
question should occupy a more prominent position than 
the admission of the people of India to a larger and more 
direct share in the Government of their country. More 
natives ought to be placed on the Council of the Viceroy 
in order to give it a more representative character. At 
the present time only three natives are on the Council, 
and only one of these is a British subject. He has 

> On being appealed to, in the House, to name the Governor of Bom- 
bay under whom this transaction took place, I stated that it was Sir Bartle 
Frere. Sir Bartle Frere in a letter he subsequently addressed to me 
disclaimed the responsibility, and wished me to withdraw the statement I 
had previously made. I had an opportunity two days afterwards of stating 
in the House that on referring to Lord Lawrence's evidence I found that I 
had accurately described every fact connected with the building of this 
country-house, but that the transaction took place partly under the Gover- 
norship of Sir Bartle Frere and partly under that of his successor, Sir 
Seymour Fitzgerald. I therefore at once expressed my regret that I had 
done Sir Bartle Frere an injustice in not associating Sir Seymour Fitz- 
gerald's name with his. 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 101 

only been on the Council a few months, and previously 
no native British subject had a seat on the Council. 
It is moreover admitted in an official report just issued 
that there is no one on the Council to represent the 
wishes and the wants of the poorer classes, who form 
the vast majority of the population. The establish- 
ment of local Consultative Councils has been earnestly 
recommended by Sir D. Macleod and many of the 
ablest of Indian statesmen. The rapid spread of local 
taxation makes it of vital importance that there should 
be no delay in the creation of these Consultative Coun- 
cils. Unfortunately the' people now believe, and they 
have certainly valid reasons for the belief, that the 
policy which is now being pursued towards them 
is intended not to afford greater but less facilities 
for taking part in the government of their country. 
The establishment of the Engineering College at 
Cooper's Hill will render it more hopeless than 
ever for the natives to obtain employment as Govern- 
ment engineers. A few years ago some scholarships 
were established which enabled natives to come to 
England to compete in the Indian Civil Service. These 
scholarships were abolished on the plea that a certain 
number of natives would be admitted direct to the 
covenanted service. The scholarships were abolished 
four years ago, and the promise to admit natives to 
the Civil Service still remains a dead letter. The rules 
under which they were to be admitted have not yet 
even been promulgated. Remember these things are 
done in face of the solemn pledge given by the 
English nation, that all subjects of the Queen should 
be freely and impartially admitted to offices under the 



102 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

Government. Can we be surprised that there is dis- 
content in India ? May we not rather be thankful 
that there is not something worse ? A native may 
possess an amount of administrative ability which, if 
possessed by an Englishman, would secure him the 
highest position in the State. But for such a one 
there is no place in the government of his country. 
Sir Madhava Rao administered Travancore with so 
much skill as justly to entitle him to be considered 
the Turgot of India. One of the official reports on his 
administration says, " He found Travancore when he 
went there in 1849 in the lowest stage of degradation. 
He has left it a model state." The Times Calcutta 
correspondent in the Times of November 11th, 1872, 
says : . " When he went there everything was in dis- 
order. The Treasury was in a state almost beyond 
description ; the law-courts an utter sham ; the police, 
what police always will be when they are allowed to 
exercise unrestrained power and earn their own pay 
apart from their employers. All this was transformed 
by the man who has been invited to take office under 
Holkar. He made the law strong, the police orderly 
and efficient, brought the revenues into order, and was 
soon able to undertake public works, to start and sup- 
port great educational schemes, and, in short, to leave 
a model state. This is the kind of man for whom we 
have no proper opening — at a time when our re- 
sources are declared to be inelastic, and when if the 
opium revenue failed us we should not know where 
to turn for the amount required." Sir Madhava Eao 
cleared off an onerous debt, abolished many vexatious 
taxes, raised the pay of the public servants to " secure 



INDIAN FINANCE. II. 103 

honesty," spent large sums on education and public 
works, and placed the revenues of Travancore in such 
a position that there is now each year a considerable 
surplus. "All this was done by good State house- 
wifery, by pure management," the management, how- 
ever, of financial genius and high statesmanship, and 
moreover without adding a penny to taxation. The 
Times, in referring to this account of Sir Madhava R£o, 
makes the following most suggestive remarks : " The 
notion of employing a native financier to aid in the 
work of raising a revenue from native tax-payers seems 
to us completely in accord with common sense. Sir 
Madhava Eao, we are told, managed things adroitly, 
and accomplished his ends rather by good homely 
State housewifery than by any dazzling stroke of 
finance. We confess we regard this description as 
about the highest compliment that could be "paid. 
There is not a householder in this kingdom who does 
not know, or who is not quickly taught, the difference 
between ■ management ' and 'muddle/ It is felt 
in a thousand ways, and produces effects out of all 
proportion to anticipation. We cannot but fear that 
it is sensibly experienced in the financial administra- 
tion of India." It is then further remarked : " Not- 
withstanding the determined and ingenious defence 
made by the Department in London whenever adverse 
criticism is heard in the House of Commons, we cannot 
bring ourselves to feel confidence in the Budgets of 
our successive Ministers at Calcutta. We will go 
farther, and say, that men not at all given to timidity 
look upon the financial position of India with anxiety, 
and, though fully admitting the wealth of the country 



104 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

and its capacity to yield large yearly sums to Govern- 
ment, they believe that taxation is not only becoming 
inordinately heavy, but that it is not imposed accord- 
ing to the wisest methods. It is true that Indian 
deficits are, speaking relatively, of no extravagant 
amount, and that the Public Debt of the Empire is not 
of any alarmiag magnitude. But there remains the 
unwelcome fact that Ave are straining ourselves in 
a time of peace, and that no further resource has been 
suggested by our statesmen beyond a tax which, even 
when kept down to an insignificant amount, has proved 
a cause of irritation and misgiving throughout the 
country. We send out cnen of great general ability, 
but not always skilled in the department of finance. 
Even when they possess this special knowledge it is in 
connexion with European systems, and does not insure 
any "real skill in raising Asiatic revenues. It is in 
accordance with what might be expected, that a native 
financier, conversant with the habits of his country- 
men, should be able to increase a revenue without 
pressing intolerably on the taxpayer." I cannot, I 
think, do better than bring what I fear has been far 
too long a speech to a close by asking the House care- 
fully to reflect upon the remarks which I have just 
quoted. They seem to me with admirable force and 
brevity not only to describe our present financial 
position in India, but to indicate the causes of our 
embarrassment, and what should in future be the 
policy of our financial administration. India has 
suffered from carelessness, mismanagement, and ex- 
travagance. She requires the frugality and the atten- 
tion to small details which characterise a well-ordered 



INDIAN FINANCE. II 105 

household. The most admirably devised laws, the 
most skilled systems of jurisprudence will be of little 
avail if the gulf between the rulers and the ruled is 
permitted to widen. Not only must we secure the 
sympathy of the people in order to obtain content- 
ment, but until they become partners with us in the 
Government of their country, we shall never become 
sufficiently acquainted with their habits, their wishes, 
and their wants, to enable us to justify the continuance 
of our empire in the East by proving that it promotes 
the happiness and the moral and material advance- 
ment of the people. It now only remains for me to 
tender to Honourable Members my sincere thanks 
for the patience with which they have listened to me. 
I fear I have been far too long, and yet I know that 
only a small portion of what ought to be said has 
been said. I may have spoken warmly, but I have 
not said a single word which I do not feel, and the 
House, I trust, will believe that I am prompted by no 
other motive than to endeavour to induce the English 
Parliament and the English nation to give a due 
amount of consideration to the wants of a vast popula- 
lation, the mass of whom, after a century of England's 
rule, are, to quote the memorable words of Lord Law- 
rence, " so miserably poor that they have barely the 
means of subsistence 1 ." 



1 At the conclusion of this speech Mr McCullagh Torrens moved 
the adjournment of the debate. The Government arranged that the 
debate should be resumed at the morning sitting on the next day, 
Friday, Aug. 1 ; but as other business was put before it, the debate did 
not commence till 4"30 p.m. and was again adjourned, as the sitting had to 
be suspended at 7 p.m. The most unusual course was then adopted of 
resuming the debate at a morning sitting on Saturday. Difficult as it 



106 INDIAN FINANCE. II. 

always is to obtain the attendance of members three days before a proro- 
gation, it is much more difficult on a Saturday than on any other day. 
During the three hours that the debate lasted on Saturday, there were at 
no time 20 members in the House. Under these circumstances the Reso- 
lution was withdrawn. Even if it had been decided to divide upon it, it is 
more than probable that no division could have been taken ; for by the 
rules of the House if there are less than 40 members in a division, the 
sitting is at once suspended and the division becomes null and void. 



THE BIRMINGHAM LEAGUE AND THE 
EDUCATION ACT 1 . 



I so entirely agree with all the arguments which 
have been advanced in this debate in favour of gene- 
ral compulsory education, by my honourable friend 
the member for Birmingham (Mr Dixon), that it will 
not be necessary for me to occupy any time by re- 
ferring to this part of the subject, except that I shall 
by and bye offer a suggestion which I believe would, 
if adopted, help on that general system of compul- 
sory education which Mr Dixon and his friends have 
so much at heart. My chief reason for asking the 
attention of the House for a short time is that, as 
I was one of the earliest members of the Birmingham 
League, and as many arguments have been put for- 

1 This Speech was made, Thursday, July 17, 1873, in support of 
the Second reading of the Elementary Education Act Amendment Bill. 
The two main provisions of the Bill as originally introduced by the Govern- 
ment were : — 1st, That Poor Law Guardians should pay the fees of indigent 
children instead of School Boards, but that this payment should not be 
considered parochial relief ; 2ndly, it was provided that Denison's Act, which 
allowed Poor Law Guardians to enforce school attendance upon those 
children whose parents were in receipt of out-door relief, should be made 
obligatory instead of permissive. At the commencement of the debate on 
the Second Reading, the Vice-President of the Council (Mr Forster) on 
behalf of the Government announced that the first of these two proposals 
had been abandoned. 



108 THE BIRMINGHAM LEAGUE AND 

ward this evening in the name of that body with 
which I do not agree, I am not unnaturally desirous 
to explain the cause of this difference of opinion. I 
am the more anxious to do so because I believe that 
during the ensuing winter-months a sectarian agitation 
will be got up that will subject many hon. Members 
to pledges which, if fulfilled, will prove most mis- 
chievous to the cause of education. I was certainly 
not in favour of the Bill of the Government as origin- 
ally introduced, and I am perfectly prepared to vote 
now, as I have voted before, in favour of the repeal 
of the 25th clause ; but I objected to the Bill of the 
Government as originally introduced, for reasons very 
different from those which have been put forward by Mr 
Dixon, In the first place, it may be well to ask, what is 
the cause of the Government being placed in the not 
very dignified position which they occupy this evening ? 
Having for months had the problem before them, how 
to deal with the vexed question of the 25th clause, they 
proposed a solution of it so unsatisfactory to the coun- 
try that they have been obliged to abandon it before 
the debate on the Second Beading of the Bill com- 
menced. It is not difficult to understand how the 
Government have placed themselves in their present 
position. It is the old story : they had not the courage 
of their opinions, they were afraid to call a spade a 
spade. Why did their proposal in reference to the 
25th clause meet with no support ? Simply because 
they adopted an unfortunate middle course, for which 
there was no justification, no defence. After having 
proposed to associate parochial relief with education, 
they inserted words in their Bill which declared that 



THE EDUCATION ACT. 109 

the parochial relief it was intended to give was not 
parochial relief. Was ever a more absurd course 
adopted than to say that the Poor Law Guardians 
should defray the cost of the children's education, and 
yet that the parents should not be supposed to be 
receiving parochial relief, but some gratuity in the 
shape of a bounty or reward ? If the strict system 
under which the Poor Law is administered were 
gradually to be relaxed, the country would soon be 
deluged with pauperism. If payment for the educa- 
tion of a man's children is not to be regarded as 
parochial relief, why should the payment for neces- 
saries supplied to his sick wife or children be regarded* 
as parochial relief ? The Vice-President of the Council 
(Mr Forster) — in fact every member of the Govern- 
ment — must be well aware that there is not a single 
logical argument in favour of calling payment for the 
education of a man's children by any other name than 
parochial relief, and the country would soon come to 
the conclusion that what was in fact poor relief should 
be designated by that term. I have had an oppor- 
tunity of consulting some of the most active members 
of the London School Board in reference to the pay- 
ment of the fees of poor children, and they seem to 
be unanimously of opinion that the Poor Law Guar- 
dians are much better judges of whether the fees of 
any particular children ought to be paid than the 
members of a School Board possibly can be. It is 
peculiarly within the province of Poor Law Guardians 
to inquire into the circumstances of parents who may 
be applicants for relief. Nothing can be more un- 
fortunate than to have two conflicting authorities to 



110 THE BIRMINGHAM LEAGUE AND 

do the same kind of work. The utmost confusion 
would be created, and a severe blow would be struck 
at administrative efficiency, if, for instance, on the 
very day the Guardians came to the conclusion that 
a man was not entitled to receive relief, the School 
Board should decide that he was so poor that it was 
necessary to pay the school-fees of his children. Can 
there be a more indisputable proof of destitution than 
that a man is so deplorably poor that he cannot pay 
twopence a week for his child's education ? If there- 
fore the Government had acted logically, if, in trans- 
ferring the payment of the school-fees of poor children 
from the School Boards to the Guardians, they had 
been prepared to declare that the payment of these 
fees should be regarded as parochial relief, depend 
upon it many would have come forward and warmly 
supported the Government Bill who have now met 
it with silent indifference or with active hostility. 
The advocates of compulsory education cannot pursue 
a more inconsistent course, or one more likely indefi- 
nitely to defer the end they have in view, than to 
encourage a belief amongst the people that there is a 
fundamental difference between the relief given from 
rates on behalf of education, and relief given from 
rates to provide food, clothing, medical attendance, or 
other necessaries. It cannot be too carefully borne in 
mind, that unless we are prepared to regard education 
as a necessary which the parent is as much bound 
to give to his children as he is to provide them with 
food and clothing, every argument in favour of 
compulsory education at once falls to the ground. 
How is it possible to justify the interference of the 



THE EDUCATION ACT. Ill 

State with the parent unless we are prepared to 
maintain that the parent is bound to provide educa- 
tion for his children, and if he neglects to do so, the 
State has a right to interfere on behalf of the chil- 
dren ? It often has struck me as being singularly 
anomalous to hear many of the most ardent advocates 
of compulsory education object to the payment of 
school-fees being considered parochial relief. They 
say it puts the stigma of pauperism upon those parents 
who receive this assistance, but is there any one upon 
whom the so-called stigma of pauperism can be more 
legitimately placed than upon those parents who can- 
not, or will not, pay a few pence a week for their 
children's education ? Remember, in the case of ill- 
ness this stigma is placed upon those who cannot 
provide medical attendance for themselves or their 
families. With regard to the 25th clause, I have on 
a previous occasion stated that my objections to it 
are very different from those put forward in the name 
of the Birmingham League. I object to it chiefly on 
economic grounds. In the first place, I believe that 
the members of a School Board are not the best per- 
sons to judge whether the circumstances of any par- 
ticular parent are such as to entitle him to have the 
education of his children paid for entirely out of the 
rates ; and, secondly, I believe that as those children 
whose fees are remitted can be sent to denomina- 
tional schools, it may in some cases happen that de- 
nominational zeal would induce School Boards to pay 
the fees of children whose parents can perfectly well 
afford to pay the fees themselves. That this may 
occur is proved by the fact of the alarming extent 



112 THE BIRMINGHAM LEAGUE AND 

to which school-fees have been remitted in Manches- 
ter, whereas in other towns, where the people are not 
at all better off than in Manchester, there has been 
scarcely any remission of fees at all. Such economi- 
cal considerations as these suggest, I venture to think, 
much more serious arguments against the 25th clause 
than the religious objections which are so persistently 
urged against it by the Nonconformists and the Bir- 
mingham League. When the Birmingham League 
was first constituted I held a very decided opinion that 
if it concerned itself at all with what is known as the 
religious difficulty, it had better at once accept the pro- 
gramme of secular education. No two persons agree 
as to what is meant by unsectarian religious instruction, 
and it is impossible in an Act of Parliament to define 
either it, or what is sometimes called undogmatic re- 
ligion. Nothing can be more absurd or indefensible 
than that wretched compromise formerly accepted 
by the League, that the Bible should be read without 
note or comment. Such a proposal was certain to 
alienate those who were in favour of secular teaching, 
and was certain not to conciliate those who wished 
that with secular teaching there should be associated 
religious or sectarian instruction. So far as my own 
individual opinions are concerned, I am as much in 
favour as any one can be both of secular education 
and of religious equality, but as a practical politician 
I am bound to consider existing facts, and to re- 
member that in the matter of education we are not 
starting de novo. If this was the first time that the 
State was going to concern itself with education, if 
we were now for the first time going to devote public 



THE EDUCATION ACT. 113 

money to the erection and maintenance of schools, 
we might do many things which I believe, under ex- 
isting circumstances, it is impossible to do. Nothing 
appears to me to be more certain than that the country 
will never consent to the property at present embark- 
ed in voluntary denominational schools being thrown 
away. Nonconformists and others, who, like myself, 
now avow ourselves to be in favour of a general system 
of secular education, are bound in common fairness to 
remember that we are partly responsible for calling 
into existence the present voluntary denominational 
schools. Year after year large grants of public money 
have been given to these schools, and when the Edu- 
cation Vote has been proposed, it has either been 
supported or tacitly assented to, by many who now 
make the loudest protestations about the offence which 
is offered to their conscience, if a few shillings are 
given from the rates to pay the fees of some poor 
children who are attending a denominational school. 
For the life of me, I cannot understand why a man's 
conscience is not offended if money raised from im- 
perial taxes is given to denominational schools, whilst 
at the same time he is grievously offended if one 
single penny which has been obtained from rates is 
expended in denominational education ! If the tax- 
collector comes and collects £5 in the form of inhabited 
house duty, no objection is made if a portion of the 
money is given to some denominational school ; when, 
however, the rate-collector comes an hour afterwards, 
and collects £5 in the same house from the same in- 
dividual in the form of rates, language cannot be found 
strong enough to describe the wrong which is done 
f.s. 8 



114 THE BIRMINGHAM LEAGUE AND 

to the conscience of the householder if a single penny 
of this latter sum should find its way to a denomina- 
tional school. Was there ever a more untenable 
position taken up by a great and powerful party? 
It is moreover easy to shew that many of those who 
urge conscientious objections to the 25th clause are 
more responsible than any one else for levying forced 
contributions from others in support of some of their 
own denominational institutions. In the debate the 
other night on the Rating Bill, it was demonstrated 
by the Prime Minister, in a most masterly and con- 
vincing speech, that if you exempt some people or 
some kind of property from rates you compulsorily 
levy additional rates from other people and from other 
kinds of property. Who at the present time are the 
most powerful and influential advocates of maintaining 
the existing exemption from rates of Bagged schools, 
Sunday schools, and churches and chapels ? Why we 
all know that one chief reason why these exemptions 
cannot be abolished is that if such a thing were pro- 
posed, the Nonconformists from one end of the country 
to the other would be united as one man to resist it. 
The Government in their Bating Bill, which is now 
before the House, proposed to abolish the privilege 
which Sunday and Bagged schools now enjoy of being 
exempted from rates ; but they became so alarmed at 
what they had done — in fact they were so appalled 
at the hostility aroused not only in Church, but also 
in Dissenting congregations, — that they not only 
abandoned their proposal, but, in order to prove that 
their repentance was complete, they actually went 
into the lobby and voted against this particular part 



THE EDUCATION ACT 115 

of their own bill. During a portion of each year I 
reside in Cambridge. Not long since a considerable 
amount of property in that town which paid a large 
amount to the rates was pulled down, and on the site 
a handsome Dissenting chapel has been erected, the 
foundation stone of which was laid by the hon. member 
for Bristol (Mr S. Morley). As the chapel will not 
pay a single penny to the rates, my own rates and 
the rates of every other ratepayer in the town will 
be pro tanto increased by the erection of this chapel. 
Although I am a very moderate Churchman I object 
to being forced in this way to give a yearly subscrip- 
tion to a Dissenting chapel. But if as a moderate 
Churchman I object to such a proceeding, what must 
be the feelings of more ardent Churchmen, such, for 
instance, as the Prime Minister, or the hon. member 
for North Warwickshire (Mr Newdigate)? I believe 
that hon. gentleman is at the present moment com- 
pelled, in the way I have pointed out, to contribute 
to many a Catholic chapel, and to many a convent 
school. Are those who conscientiously object to pay 
the smallest modicum to denominational education 
prepared to be consistent? Well if they are, I will 
give them an opportunity of proving their consistency ; 
for when the Rating Bill is next in Committee, I will, 
if I receive any encouragement, propose to abolish the 
exemption from rates which is now enjoyed by Sunday 
schools, Bagged schools, chapels, and churches. If such 
a proposal were brought forward we all know the 
kind of reception it would meet with in this House. 
It is doubtful whether ten members would be found 
to support it. I am very anxious not in any way 

8-2 



116 THE BIRMINGHAM LEAGUE AND 

to misapprehend the reasons which induce so many, 
whose sincerity no one can doubt, to object on con- 
scientious grounds to the payment of fees of poor 
children in denominational schools. They say that 
it would be more in accordance with religious equality, 
if all those children whose fees were remitted were 
compelled to attend a Board school. I do not wish 
to deny this as an abstract proposition, but what- 
ever theoretical arguments may be advanced in favour 
of the adoption of such a course, it seems to me 
that there are three unanswerable arguments against 
compelling these children to attend Board schools. 
In the first place, the voluntary denominational 
school is often much nearer the child's home than 
the Board school which he would be compelled to 
attend. As far as my own individual opinion is con- 
cerned, I would far sooner that the child were attend- 
ing 1 the Board school. But this is a case in which 
something more than our own individual opinions 
must be considered. We are bound at any rate to 
take some notice of what is most convenient for the 
child. "When there is a denominational school within 
a stone's throw of the child's home, is it not perfectly 
monstrous that an ill-clad child should be compelled 
in all weathers, in snow and in rain, to walk two 
or three miles to a Board school, in order that effect 
may be given to the conscientious scruples of sensitive 
ratepayers ? Secondly, if children are driven into 
Board schools, it will of course be necessary to increase 
the accommodation provided by these schools, and 
a considerable additional charge will as a consequence 
be thrown upon the rates. The ratepayers, in their 



THE ED UGA TION ACT. 117 

present state of susceptibility, would object to this. 
They would regard it as an indefensible waste of their 
money to be compelled to provide additional school 
accommodation out of the rates because certain people 
disapproved of children being sent to voluntary schools 
already in existence ; the parents, be it remembered, 
preferring these voluntary schools to the Board schools. 
Thirdly, it seems to me that we are bound to consider 
the subject from an educational point of view, rather 
than as a question affecting the consciences of rate- 
payers and parents. Those who are in favour of 
general compulsion must be aware that under any 
circumstances it will be hard enough to carry out 
a system of general compulsion, and I believe that 
the difficulty will become insurmountable if the oppo- 
nents of compulsory education are armed with the 
plausible argument that children are forced into schools 
to which their parents have conscientious objections. 
It is shewn by the experience of every country that 
has a system of national education, that under such 
circumstances compulsion will not work. 

With regard to the question whether or not the 
Second reading of the bill ought to be supported, I cer- 
tainly cannot follow the example of Mr Dixon, who has 
stated that when the division is called he shall walk out 
of the House. If the bill is a bad bill, we ought to 
oppose it. If, on the other hand, the bill is a good one, 
we ought to support it regardless of the interpretation 
that may be put upon our votes by the constituencies. 
No one can pretend to deny that the bill will fail 
to remedy many of the defects in the Elementary 
Education Act which most need amendment. It 



118 THE BIRMINGHAM LEAGUE AND 

leaves the 25th clause untouched, and it does little 
to carry out the promise given last year by Mr Forster 
on behalf of the Government, that the absurdity 
known as permissive compulsion should cease, and that 
the attendance of all children at school should, as far 
possible, be secured. The greatest defect in the Ele- 
mentary Education Act was that it did scarcely any 
thing at all for the education of the rural districts, and 
this amending bill does not even pretend to do any 
thing for the rural districts. Fully admitting all these 
shortcomings, we still have to ask ourselves whether 
this bill, small as its proportions may be, will do good 
so far as it goes. It certainly seems to me that there 
cannot be much hesitation in the answer to be given 
to this question, and, acting on the old adage that 
half a loaf is better than no bread, I shall certainly vote 
for the Second reading of the bill. I could not have 
done so if the provision had been retained, that money 
given by Guardians to pay the school-fees of children 
should not be considered parochial relief. It appears 
to me, however, that nothing but good will result 
from enacting, as this bill will do, that parents who 
are in receipt of out-door relief shall be compelled to 
send their children to school. We have been told 
on good authority that this will secure the attendance 
at school of 200,000 additional children. This will be 
a great direct gain, and I shall presently endeavour 
to shew that scarcely less importance is to be attri- 
buted to the indirect consequences which will result 
from the measure. My hon. friend the member for 
Finsbury (Mr McCullagh Torrens), in a very able 
speech, has asked us to reject the bill by moving the 



THE EDUCATION ACT. 119 

previous question. No one who listened to his speech, 
as well as to the speech of the hon. baronet, the mem- 
ber for South Devon (Sir Massey Lopes), who seconded 
him, can fail to perceive what is at the bottom of their 
opposition. They are no doubt both as anxious as any 
one in this House to see these pauper children edu- 
cated, but, being zealous guardians of the ratepayers' 
interests, they say : — " Do not let the education of 
these pauper children be paid for out of the rates ; 
let it be paid for out of imperial funds." I have 
often had occasion to protest against these persistent 
attempts to transfer charges from local to imperial 
funds. It has been urged by those who oppose this 
bill that it would have a tendency to increase out- door 
relief, but would not infinitely greater encouragement 
be given to out-door relief if local authorities were 
permitted to draw from that inexhaustible mine of 
wealth, the Consolidated Fund ? Where then should 
we look for any guarantees for economy ? Differing 
in toto from what has been said on the subject by 
Mr McCullagh Torrens, I believe that this bill, far 
from encouraging out-door relief, would exercise a not 
unimportant influence in discouraging it. Many an 
applicant would probably relinquish his intention of 
applying for out-door relief if he knew that his children 
must be sent to school as a condition of his receiving 
that relief. The lavishness with which out- door relief 
is administered is responsible for no small part of our 
existing pauperism, and therefore I can but welcome 
anything which may make this relief appear to be less 
acceptable than it was before. Mr Torrens has in 
forcible language described the hardships which he 



120 THE BIRMINGHAM LEAGUE AND 

believes this bill might inflict on the poor in London. 
He spoke, however, as if it would introduce compul- 
sion for the first time, but in London and in other 
towns where compulsion had been adopted, every one 
of the children affected by this bill ought by law to be 
already at school. The bill, therefore, in such places 
would not introduce a new principle, but would simply 
give an additional security for the carrying out of 
compulsion, for it would make the Poor Law Guardians 
as well as the School Boards responsible for the 
education of pauper children. In those districts where 
compulsory education has not yet been adopted, I 
entirely agree with Sir Massey Lopes that the thin 
end of the wedge will be introduced by this bill, but 
this is the chief reason which induces me to support 
it. The wedge will indeed be so effectually introduced 
that it will be our own fault if we do not drive it 
home, for this measure will take us so far that we 
must inevitably go farther. Acknowledging, as we 
are all prepared to do, that education is a great bless- 
ing to children, we cannot surely be content to see 
a system continued which would secure this blessing 
to those who happen to be paupers, but would not 
secure it to those children whose parents have never 
received parochial relief. Why, under such a state of 
things, a child would actually have to be congratulated 
on the fact that his father was a pauper! 

In conclusion, I will only say that I believe the 
present agitation of the Birmingham League will 
involve the country in a miserable sectarian squabble 
which certainly will not promote the intellectual de- 
velopment of any adult or of any child. If the mem- 



THE EDUCATION ACT. 121 

bers of the League would concentrate their efforts 
in trying to obtain the first object of the League, viz. 
general compulsion, and spend the winter months in 
promoting it instead of provoking sectarian wrangles, 
then there will probably be next year a much stronger 
feeling in favour of compulsion, and there will also 
be a much greater chance of obtaining it from the 
Government, than there will be if the League persists 
in its present policy. I am quite aware that the 
opinions which I have this evening expressed may 
very probably involve me in a considerable amount 
of unpopularity, but I started political life caring more 
about the general education of the people than about 
any other question that is likely to be discussed in 
this House. I have seen no reason to change my 
opinion, and I therefore should be pursuing an un- 
worthy course, if, from the fear of incurring a certain 
amount of unpopularity, I remained silent when I 
believe there is a considerable amount of danger that 
the great end which we must all have in view, viz, 
the general education of the people of this country, 
may be lost sight of by being enveloped in the mists of 
a sectarian squabble. 



THE NINE HOURS BILL 1 



It will be in the recollection of the House that at the 
close of the long speech with which my honourable friend 
the member for Sheffield (Mr Mundella) introduced 
the Second reading of this bill, not more than about 
five minutes remained before the debate, by the rules 
of the House, had to be suspended. It was only 
possible for me during, these few brief minutes to pro- 
test against some aspersions which had, I thought, 
been unjustly cast upon the character of those em- 
ployers who are opposed to this measure, and to 
indicate in very general terms the reasons which have 
induced me to meet the Second reading of the bill 
with the amendment of which I have given notice. 

In order to present as clear an issue as possible 
to the House, I am desirous at the outset to state 
that the bill may be divided into two entirely distinct 
portions. One part of the bill asks us to legislate for 
children; by another part of the bill it is intended 

1 This Speech was made on July 30, 1873, in moving the following reso- 
lution in opposition to the Second reading of Mr Mundella's Factory Acts 
Amendment Bill :— "That in the opinion of this House it is undesirable to 
sanction a measure which would discourage the employment of women by 
subjecting their labour to a new legislative restriction to which it is not 
proposed to subject the labour of men." 



THE NINE HOURS BILL. 123 

both directly and indirectly to subject the labour of 
adults to certain new legislative restrictions. So far 
as the bill affects the employment of children, I have 
not a single word to say in opposition to it. On the 
contrary, no one would more cordially welcome pro- 
posals to raise the age at which children should be 
permitted to commence working, to extend the period 
of half-time, and to provide additional securities for 
the more efficient education of children when employed 
as half-timers. 

So far as we are able to judge from the opinions 
which have been express sd by employers in reference 
to the employment and education of children, it would 
appear that the portion of the bill which refers to 
children might be passed with the general approval 
of the House. It is important to bear this in mind 
in order to obtain a distinct idea of the real points at 
issue between the supporters and the opponents of 
the bill. It has been attempted to make the country 
believe that many of the employers are anxious to have 
children overworked, and are perfectly indifferent to 
their education. 

Probably there is no one in this House who is 
pecuniarily less interested in industrial undertakings 
than I am. I have not a shilling embarked in any 
one of the trades which would be affected by this bill. 
This has been one reason which has induced me to 
assume the responsibility of opposing the bill. If 
the amendment of which I have given notice had been 
moved by some employer, interested motives would 
not improbably have been attributed to him, and per- 
haps he would have been accused of being more soli- 



124 THE NINE HOURS BILL. 

citous for his own gains than for the welfare of his 
work-people. As it may be difficult for many of the 
employers to defend themselves without being charged 
with self-laudation, I feel bound in common fairness 
to say that many of those who are most prominent 
in opposing this bill are acknowledged to be among the 
best employers in the country. It has been, admitted 
that there is no one in Lancashire who is more respected 
by those whom he employs for his great generosity 
and his judicious kindness than Mr Hugh Mason, and 
there is no one who has written and spoken with 
greater ability and force against the proposals in this 
bill to subject the labour of adults to legislative re- 
strictions. Many members of this House who hold 
opinions similar to those of Mr Hugh Mason are as 
much esteemed as employers as he is. 

Having made these few remarks in defence of those 
who in the course of the agitation which this measure 
is likely to excite will doubtless be subjected to many 
unjust insinuations, I will at once ask the House to 
consider the vitally important issues which are raised 
by this bill so far as it will affect the labour of adults. 

It can, I think, be proved beyond dispute that 
this measure must operate in one of two ways. It 
will either be a Nine Hours Bill for men as well as 
for women, or it will place the labour of women under 
such serious disadvantages as greatly to restrict their 
employment. If the bill is intended to be a general 
nine hours bill, then the House has not been fairly 
dealt with ; for why do not the promoters of the 
measure boldly come forward and tell us what they 
want? If they want this House to decide how long 



THE NINE HOURS BILL. 125 

the artisans of this country shall be permitted to work, 
let them at least have the courage to tell us at what 
they are aiming. Do not let them cloak their inten- 
tions in the garb of a generous zeal for the welfare of 
women. 

I am perfectly ready to admit that Mr Mundella has 
emphatically denied that this is a general Nine Hours 
Bill. He has told us that nothing would induce him 
to have anything to do with a bill which would impose 
legislative restrictions upon the labour of men. But 
there may be the widest possible difference between 
what the promoter of an Act of Parliament wishes to 
be its consequences and what its actual consequences 
may ultimately be. Mr Mundella may not intend this 
to be a general Nine Hours Bill, but it may become 
one in spite of anything that he may say or wish to 
the contrary. But if it is not, as he asserts, a general 
Nine Hours Bill, then it can at once be proved that the 
bill must most seriously interfere with the employment 
of women. The labour of men and women is so in- 
extricably intertwined in the various manufacturing 
processes, that it seems nothing can be more absurd 
than to suppose that the women, after working nine 
hours, should be compelled by law to leave the factory, 
' and then the men should go on for another hour work- 
ing without them. It is therefore absolutely certain 
that if women are not permitted to work more than 
nine hours a day, one of two things will occur : — either 
the manufacturers will be unable to employ their men 
for more than nine hours a day ; or, if they wished 
to keep their machinery working for a longer period 
than this, they would only be able to do so by dis- 



126 THE NINE HOURS BILL. 

pensing with the labour of women altogether, or by 
employing them in double shifts like half-time children. 
It can only be proved by experience which of these 
results will ensue. 

In those branches of industry in which the 
labour of women is indispensable — and I believe this 
is the case with the great majority of industries affect- 
ed by this bill — it is evident that if we impose cer- 
tain legislative restrictions upon the labour of women, 
we virtually impose the same restrictions upon the 
labour of men. In some branches of industry, however, 
in which the women form a very small minority of the 
entire number who are employed, this bill would 
probably have the effect of causing the labour of women 
to be altogether dispensed with, or of reducing them 
to the position of half-timers. The question, therefore, 
which the House has to determine is this : Are we, 
in the first place, prepared for some of the most impor- 
tant trades in the country to enact a general nine 
hours law ? Or, are we prepared with regard to other 
trades to discourage and prohibit the employment of 
women ? We probably have never been asked to give 
a decision upon issues of greater importance. Let 
me begin with the first. 

I am perfectly well aware of the prejudice which 
will be industriously excited against those who oppose 
such legislation as is now contemplated. It therefore 
becomes of greater consequence that we should make 
the grounds of our opposition as intelligible as pos- 
sible. I therefore desire in the first instance to affirm 
that this House has no right to interfere with the 
labour of adults ; and secondly, if it had the right, 



THE NINE HOURS BILL. 127 

it would be singularly impolitic to exercise it at the 
present time. If we once accept the principle that 
grown-up persons cannot determine for themselves the 
number of hours which they shall work, we virtually 
treat them as if they were helpless children who find 
it so impossible to get on without our control and 
guidance, that we shall soon have to regulate their 
wages. And when are we asked to start on this 
career of paternal legislature ? When are we asked 
to wrap the artisan population of this country in the 
swaddling-clothes of babyhood ? Why at the very time 
when our working classes are proving, in a thousand 
hard-fought industrial contests between themselves and 
their employers, that they have not only the will but 
the power to protect their own interests. But even 
if the State had the right to decide how many hours 
a day a grown-up person should work, I confidently 
appeal to the House, whether it would not be impo- 
litic to exercise this right. My chief contention is 
this : that the working classes can settle such a ques- 
tion as this far better for themselves than the State 
can settle it for them. No one now would think 
of invoking the aid of Parliament to determine the 
amount of remuneration which our artisans should 
receive for their labour, and if they can regulate the 
amount of their wages, why in the name of common 
sense cannot they also arrange the number of hours 
which they shall work \ Not only have they the 
power to decide for themselves what shall be ' the 
length of the day's work, but I believe they will 
decide it far better without than with the assistance 
of this House. Employers and employed know the 



128 THE NINE HOURS BILL. 

peculiar circumstances of each branch of industry in- 
finitely better than they can be known by this House. 
Employers and employed if left to themselves can 
make such arrangements as are most fitted for each 
special trade. Occasionally it may happen that it 
is desirable to work somewhat longer than the ordi- 
nary time. The employed recognize the truth of this 
just as much as do the employers ; for it is particu- 
larly to be noted that in those trades where the em- 
ployed have been most successful in shortening the 
hours of labour, they have always suggested certain 
arrangements for occasionally working over-time. Ar- 
rangements for controlling trade which are voluntarily 
made between employer and employed have not the 
rigidity and unchangeableness of a legislative enact- 
ment. They possess sufficient elasticity to be adapted 
to the peculiar circumstances of each special case ; 
but this bill, on the contrary, proposes to lay down 
one uniform rule for a great variety of industrial pro- 
cesses which often differ widely in the character and 
quality of the work they require. If we pass this 
bill, it will be decreed by an inflexible rule that in 
the most important trades in the country no woman 
shall under any circumstances whatever work for more 
than a certain prescribed number of hours. 

It has been said, and it will no doubt be often 
repeated, that it is now too late to raise objections to 
Parliamentary interference with the labour of adults ; 
such interference was sanctioned by the Factory Acts, 
and no one would now think of repealing them. As 
I have before remarked, so far as these acts refer to 
the labour of those who are not adults, not only do 



THE NINE HOURS BILL. 129 

I not wish to repeal them, but I should be perfectly 
willing to strengthen them and to attempt to render 
them more efficient. But legislative interference with 
the employment of adults cannot at the present time 
be regarded in precisely the same light as it was when 
the Factory Acts were passed a quarter of a century 
since. The trade of the country has now to contend 
with many difficulties which were then scarcely fore- 
seen. I shall presently refer to the serious effects 
which may be produced upon the industrial future of 
our country by the rise in the price of coal. Again, 
if the existing Factory Acts are to be quoted as a 
conclusive argument in favour of this bill, the same 
kind of reasoning would justify an eight, nay, even a 
seven hours bill. 

Lastly, it may be asked, what becomes of the great 
progress in the people's condition which was quoted 
as an unanswerable argument in favour of their politi- 
cal enfranchisement, if they require the protection of 
the State just as much now as they did twenty- 
five years since ? Those, I think, do a very serious 
injury to the working classes who are perpetually en- 
couraging them to ask the State to do what they 
could far more effectually do for themselves. 

It has lately been shewn how much more promptly 
and properly a matter is dealt with when the people 
take it into their own hands than when they rely 
upon Acts of Parliament. It will be in the recollection 
of the House that last year the Home Secretary in- 
troduced a bill with the view of putting down truck. 
Something like sixty Acts had already been passed 
with the same object, and we were told that in spite of 
f. s. 9 



130 THE NINE HOURS BILL. 

all this legislation truck was flourishing as vigorously 
as ever. Directly I read the bill of the Home Secre- 
tary, I determined to oppose it with an amendment 
which asserted the principle that all questions as to 
the time when and the manner in which wages should 
be paid, had better be settled by the employers and 
the employed rather than by Parliament. Many came 
to me then, as they have come to me now, and said : 
" We wonder that you are insensible to the evils of 
truck, and that you wish to see them perpetuated." 
I simply 'replied : " If I held such opinions as you 
attribute to me, I would do all in my power to pro- 
mote the passing of the Home Secretary's bill, because 
experience has shewn that innumerable Truck Acts 
may be passed, and truck will continue to exist until 
those who are interested in its discontinuance take 
the subject into their own hands." It could scarcely 
have been foreseen that the truth of what has just 
been stated would be so soon proved. The bill hap- 
pily not having passed, the Home Secretary was lately 
asked whether he intended to reintroduce it during 
the present session. What was his reply ? It was 
so significant that I earnestly commend it to the parti- 
cular attention of this House. After having stated that 
he did not intend to reintroduce the bill this year, he 
went on to confess that one of the chief reasons which 
had induced him to come to this decision was, that since 
his failure to legislate last year the working classes 
had to a great extent taken the matter into their 
own hands, and had by their own voluntary efforts 
abolished truck. If Parliament would only once de- 
clare that it would never have another Truck bill 



THE NINE HOURS BILL. 131 

introduced into this House, I believe that in five years 
all that is mischievous in connection with truck would 
have ceased to exist, just as in the same way do I 
believe, that if we would once declare that it was 
entirely beyond the province of this House to decide 
how many hours an adult should work, we should 
do far more to cause the day's work to be adjusted 
to such a length as would be most advantageous both 
to employers and employed, than will ever be done 
by such a bill as we are now asked to approve. 

This is not simply a theoretical opinion, for it is 
to be particularly remarked that those trades in which 
the hours are at the present time the shortest are 
exactly those to which it has never been proposed 
to apply any legislative interference. In the nine 
hours struggle which commenced in Newcastle, and 
has been so successfully continued in other parts of 
the country, the aid of Parliament was never invoked. 
But Mr Mundella will probably rejoin : It is very well 
to leave men to take care of themselves. They are 
independent, they are free, they have the power to 
do what they think is best for themselves. But when 
we come to consider the case of women, what are 
they ? Mr Mundella has told us that they are ser- 
vants up to the age of 16 or 17 : they then enjoy a 
year or two of independence ; they then marry, and 
are henceforward the slaves of their masters 1 . 



1 Mr Mundella, in a speech he subsequently made on the withdrawal of 
his bill, endeavoured to show that in using the expression " the slaves of 
their masters" he wished to imply that women were slaves of the em- 
ployers not of their husbands. But if we are to accept this interpretation, 
why did he say that women enjoyed a year or two of independence between 
the period of childhood and marriage ? An employer would not be less f> 

9—2 



132 THE NINE HOURS BILL. 

In the former debate some who are opposing this 
bill were taunted with being "cold-blooded econo- 
mists." But we have never been so cold-blooded as 
to bring such an accusation against our fellow-country- 
men. If this assertion were as correct as I believe 
it to be incorrect, instead of sending an expedition 
to Zanzibar to put down the slave trade, we ought 
to send an expedition to Lancashire and Yorkshire 
to emancipate our countrywomen from the fetters in 
which warm-blooded philanthropists are content to see 
them bound. But Mr Mundella was shrewd enough 
to see that the principles of his bill forced him into 
the position of saying, that the women for whom he 
proposes to legislate are slaves. 

There is only one justification for hmiting the hours 
of labour of women, unless it is proposed to subject 
the labour of men to similar legislation, and that is, 
that women are not free-agents. This is in fact the 
justification for legislating on behalf of children ; they 
are not free-agents, and this suggests at once the 
fundamental distinction between State intervention on 
behalf of children and on behalf of adults. 

But we now have to consider what may possibly 
be the second effect of this legislation : viz. that it 
may in some instances discourage the employment 
of women. 

Any one who considers the social condition of this 

slave-master to an unmarried than to a married woman. Again, it may be 
asked, how does Mr Mundella reconcile the statement that the manufac- 
turers are slave-masters to the women whom they employ, with his indig- 
nant denial in the same speech that he cast any aspersions upon the 
character of the employers ? Is it possible to say a more terribly severe 
thing against any man than that he treats a woman over whom he can 
exercise influence as a slave ? 



THE NINE HOURS BILL. 133 

country, any one who knows how many women there 
are who have a severe struggle to maintain themselves 
by toil, any one who reflects that if a woman is driven 
from honest labour she may be forced by dire necessity 
into a life of misery and degradation, will hesitate to 
sanction legislation which may possibly have the effect 
of throwing impediments in the way of women earning 
their own maintenance. I know that the workmen 
who are demanding this bill indignantly repudiate the 
idea that they are jealous of women's labour. No one 
would more regret than I should to bring against them 
any unjust accusations. We are bound at once to 
accept their assurance that they are no longer influ- 
enced by any jealousy of women's labour, and we may 
indeed rejoice that that is not to happen in the future 
which has undoubtedly sometimes occurred in the 
past. For fairness compels me to say that our work- 
men have not always been uninfluenced by this jealousy 
of women's labour. We cannot forget that some years 
ago certain trades-unionists in the Potteries impera- 
tively insisted that a certain rest for the arm, which 
they found almost essential to their work, should not 
be used by women when engaged in the same employ- 
ment. Not long since the London tailors, when on 
strike, having never admitted a woman to their union, 
attempted to coerce women from availing themselves 
of the remunerative employment which was offered 
to them in consequence of the strike. 

But this jealousy of women's labour has not been 
entirely confined to workmen. The same feeling has 
extended itself through every class of society. Last 
autumn a large number of the Post Office clerks 



134 THE NINE HOURS BILL. 

objected to the employment of women in the Post Office, 
which had been so wisely decided upon by Mr. Scuda- 
more. And we have lately had abundant opportunities 
of judging of the extent to which the medical profession 
is jealous of the competition of women practitioners. 
I think it necessary to make these remarks, as we should 
at any rate be very cautious and very watchful when 
we are asked to interfere with the employment of 
women. But we have been told that one of the great 
arguments in favour of this bill is that it is demanded 
by the fathers and husbands of the women affected 
by it. But in pressing this argument does Mr Mun- 
della forget that upon his own authority we have been 
assured that these very women are in servitude and 
slavery to these fathers and husbands, and therefore 
he asks us to place ourselves in the ridiculous position 
of letting those whom he has himself described as 
slave-masters decide what is best for their slaves ? 

But enough has now probably been said on the 
general principles involved in this bill. I will there- 
fore proceed to deal with the specific facts and state- 
ments on which Mr Mundella supports his case. 

The Government through the Home Secretary 
having stated that, "greatly as our knowledge has 
been supplemented by the report of the Commissioners 
recently appointed to investigate the condition of the 
women and children employed in factories, it is not 
large enough to justify the great economic changes 
proposed by this bill," Mr Mundella naturally came 
to the conclusion that this assertion of the Home 
Secretary must be controverted. Any one who reads 
Mr Mundella's remarks in the previous debate, and 



THE NINE HOURS BILL. 135 

at the same time remembers with how much ability 
and ingenuity he can speak, will at once see how ex- 
tremely weak is his case. Instead of directly meeting 
the assertion of the Home Secretary, he endeavoured 
to disprove it by introducing a great mass of matter 
entirely irrelevant to the measure we are now con- 
sidering. We remember, for instance, the piteous 
picture he drew of women coming to work in all 
weathers, bedrabbled in mud and wet up to their 
middles. He surely does not think that his bill will 
regulate the elements, and convert a wet day into 
a fine one. It really might be thought that there 
was a clause in the bill to supply women with water- 
proof cloaks and umbrellas. He also gave a harrowing 
description of the evils resulting from working in 
bad smells and in ill-ventilated rooms, but we look 
in vain in the bill for a single sanitary regulation. 
Again, we had a frightful account of the increasing 
number of accidents. The fallacies involved in these 
statistics of accidents will be referred to by subsequent 
speakers. But it is sufficient here to say that even 
if it is admitted that accidents have increased, this 
bill can exert no influence whatever in diminishing 
their number. There is not one word in it which 
would either cause machinery to be better fenced, 
or which would enable those who may be injured more 
easily to obtain compensation from their employers. 
We next listened to an eloquent description of the 
terrible consequences which ensue from a woman re- 
turning to work too soon after her confinement. On 
the authority of the Commissions we were told that 
when a woman thus returned to work, it was virtually 



136 THE NINE HOURS BILL. 

a sentence of death to the child. But if this bill 
became law to-morrow, a woman would be able to 
return to work within a week, nay, within a day of 
her confinement. 

It was next attempted to shame the House into 
accepting this bill, because we were asked to believe 
that in factory legislation we were behind almost every 
other European country. In one respect this is no 
doubt true. In those countries, such as Prussia, where 
there is a general system of compulsory education, 
greater security is taken for the education of factory 
children than is the case in our own country ; but, as 
I have before said, this is not the part of the bill which 
we are opposing. We are as anxious as Mr Mundella 
can be to provide additional guarantees for the educa- 
tion of factory children. The point of difference be- 
tween him and us is that we object to the new restric- 
tions which he wishes to impose upon the labour of 
adults, and with regard to this kind of legislative 
interference, instead of being behind other European 
countries, we have already imposed restrictions far 
more stringent than those which have been imposed 
in Germany, Austria, Baden, Holland, Belgium, Italy, 
Switzerland, Sweden, Bussia, or France. The Beehive 
newspaper, the leading organ of the Trades-Unionists 
in this country, which has not only warmly supported 
Mr Mundella's bill, but which has with the utmost 
asperity attacked those who venture to oppose it, has 
recently said : " England is without doubt far in 
advance of every country in this matter, whether 
we consider the law itself or the strictness of its 
execution." 



THE NINE HOURS BILL. 137 

Again, Mr Mundella endeavoured to make it appear 
that the employment of women in the textile manu- 
factures produced great mortality, and was particu- 
larly destructive of infant life. He seemed to think 
that he had proved his case when he shewed that 
there was a much greater mortality among women in 
the manufacturing districts than there is in four towns 
in the Black Country. These four towns were alluded 
to as if they were so unhealthy that the sanitary 
condition of a district must be most deplorable if it 
had a higher rate of mortality than prevails in these 
towns. But on referring to the returns of the Regis- 
trar-General, what do we discover ? These towns in 
the Black Country, so far as the mortality of married 
women is concerned — and Mr Mundella was careful 
to confine his comparison to this point — take rank, not 
among the most unhealthy, but amongst the very 
healthiest districts in the kingdom. As an instance 
of the caution which ought to be exercised in drawing 
conclusions from incomplete statistics, it may be re- 
marked that the rate of infant mortality is not greater 
in the textile towns than it is in these four towns 
where the rate of mortality of women is so low. 

But now I come to certain statements which. Mr 
Mundella made when he was not anxious to prove 
the unhealthiness of the "manufacturing districts, but 
when he was pleading for their healthiness. I should 
be the last to accuse any man of inconsistency. We 
all probably in some period of our lives have changed 
our opinions ("Hear, hear!" from Mr Mundella). 
Oh ! I quite understand that cheer. When I came 
into this House, when I was younger and perhaps more 



138 THE NINE HOURS BILL. 

enthusiastic than I am now, I was more in favour of 
legislative interference. But is it to be supposed 
that any one coming into this House is to learn 
nothing from experience ? But the inconsistency 
which I am referring to with regard to Mr Mundella 
is not a change of opinion which has gradually come 
over him, as facts have dawned upon him or as years roll 
by. I wish to direct the particular attention of the 
House to certain statements he made in reference to the 
report of the Factory Commissioners, when a few weeks 
since he was speaking in favour of the repeal of the 
Contagious Diseases Act, and to compare what he then 
said with the statements he made in reference to the 
same report when moving the second reading of this 
bill. On the former occasion we were reminded that 
two commissioners had lately been down to the manu- 
facturing districts; they had examined 10,000 children 
entirely at haphazard, and had found them healthy 
and entirely free from diathetic disease. But this 
is not the strangest part of the story. Mr Mundella 
was anxious to make a point against Sir J. Pakington, 
who had spoken in the debate on the Contagious 
Diseases Act. He therefore said, " Let the Bight 
Honourable gentleman (Sir J. Pakington) see the 
width and weight of the men of Sheffield, and then 
he will cease to deplore a sickly population." Well, if 
Sir J. Pakington will give a similar invitation to Mr 
Mundella, and ask him to visit the textile towns, he, 
in his turn, will cease to deplore a sickly population, 
for he will discover that in the health of their popula- 
tion, whether estimated by the death-rate of women 
between 15 and 45, or between 45 and 55, or the 



THE NINE HOURS BILL. 139 

death-rate of children under 10, the 15 principal tex- 
tile towns are from 15 to 20 percent, healthier than 
the sanitary paradise Mr Mundella has the happiness 
to represent. 

I have now gone through most of the statements 
of Mr Mundella, and I will refer again to the remark 
of the Home Secretary, that, although the knowledge 
of the Government has been extended by the inquiries 
of the Commissioners, the facts do not justify such 
a great economical change as is proposed by this bill. 
I hope the Home Secretary is of the same opinion 
still. I hope this sensible remark of his will not be 
repudiated by his colleagues, .and that upon this 
question he represents not only himself but the Go- 
vernment. I shall be able to shew from the report 
of the Commissioners, who were specially sent down to 
ascertain the facts of the case, that the Home Secre- 
tary did not speak half strongly enough, and that he 
ought to have said not only that the facts do not 
justify the bill, but that they absolutely disprove 
the necessity for this legislation. All the facts that 
I am about to mention are taken from this report, and 
their significance is greatly increased when it is re- 
membered that the Commissioners evidently have a 
bias in favour of this legislation. 

In the first place there is this most remarkable 
fact. They asked 163 medical men whether the 
present hours of labour were injurious to women. If 
a great majority of these medical men had answered 
this question in the affirmative, I could understand 
this bill being introduced. But far from a majority 
being of the opinion that the present hours of labour 



140 THE NINE HOURS BILL. 

are too long, only 32 out of the 163 are of this 
opinion, the remaining 131 distinctly affirming that the 
present hours are not too long. But this is not all. 
171 medical men were asked whether factory labour 
was especially injurious to women. 99 gave a direct 
negative to the question, 12 returned answers which 
were irrelevant, and the remaining 57 chiefly confined 
their remarks to defective sanitary arrangements, which 
are injurious to men and women alike, and which are 
not in the slightest degree touched by this bill. 
Medical testimony therefore entirely fails to provide 
a justification for this bill. 

I will now refer to another very remarkable ad- 
mission contained in the report of these Commissioners. 
Any one who is practically acquainted with cotton 
manufacturing processes knows perfectly well that the 
great majority of women who are employed are en- 
gaged in the Rve processes of reeling, doubling, wind- 
ing, warping and weaving. The Commissioners them- 
selves admit that three-fourths of the women employed 
in factories are engaged in one or other of these occu- 
pations, and they farther admit that these occupations 
have no debilitating tendency. It is particularly 
worthy of remark that in almost every instance the 
complaints of the Commissioners refer to evils resulting 
either from defective sanitary arrangements or from 
the employment of married women. Thus, with regard 
to defective sanitary arrangements, they speak of cess- 
pools. It surely cannot be supposed that a Nine 
Hours Bill will empty or purify a cesspool. Once 
more let me say that there is not a single sanitary 
clause in the bill. 



THE NINE HOURS BILL. 141 

Then again with regard to the employment of 
married women, it is to be observed that the bill 
makes no distinction whatever between married and 
unmarried women. It has been calculated that only 
a small minority of the women at work are married. 
The proportion is said to be about one-tenth. 

Mr Mundella : One-third of the women employed 
are married. 

Mr Fawcett : I believe such an estimate is far 
too high ; but even if we assume it to be correct, we 
must remember that perhaps not more than one-third 
of the married women have young children. Now 
the evils upon which the Commissioners lay the great- 
est stress are to be attributed to women going to work 
too soon after their confinement, and to their neglect- 
ing their young children ; now it appears from the 
figures just quoted that these evils can only happen 
in the case of a small minority of the entire number of 
women who are at work. 

I will now ask the House for a moment to consider 
some of the absurdities into which we shall be led 
if we are prepared to legislate upon the report of these 
Commissioners. In mentioning various disadvantages 
associated with the employment of women and children 
in the factories, there is one subject on which they lay 
particular stress. They bring forward medical evidence 
to shew that the diseases of the digestive organs pre- 
valent in the factory districts are induced by the 
excessive use of tea. Well, I suppose if this mania 
for legislative interference continues, we shall soon 
have introduced into this House a Permissive Pro- 
hibitory Tea Bill. 



142 THE NINE HOURS BILL. 

Having studied the report of the Commissioners 
with the greatest care, I believe I am justified in saying 
that it does not contain one single argument to justify 
legislative restriction upon the labour of adults. They 
adduce some facts with the object of shewing that 
certain restrictions should be imposed upon the em- 
ployment of married women and they mention many 
facts to prove that the sanitary condition of the mills, 
although improving, is still in a state which leaves 
much to be desired. 

Now, as I have occupied so much of the time of 
the House, I will refer very briefly to the vexed 
question of foreign competition. Others are far more 
competent to deal with it. I confess I have no special 
knowledge of the subject, but this I am bound to 
say : that considering the serious and gratifying rise 
of wages — serious in one aspect and gratifying in 
another — considering, I say, the marked rise of wages 
in this country, the great increase in the price of coal, 
the rapid development of manufacturing industry in 
countries in which formerly there were few manufactures 
— considering all these facts, we must come to the 
conclusion that foreign competition presents itself in a 
very different light from what it did some years since. 
I can speak with impartiality upon this subject be- 
cause I have no personal interest in the matter. But 
it is a subject which I have examined with the greatest 
possible interest, and I believe this to be the case : that 
at the present time in many most important branches 
of industry in this country, the competition between 
us and foreigners is so keen and so close, that if you 
place the slightest legislative impediment in the way 



THE NINE HOURS BILL. 143 

of industrial development, the balance may be turned 
against us, and our trade may greatly suffer. There 
cannot be a greater delusion than to suppose that with 
regard to foreign competition employers are chiefly 
concerned. They have accumulated capital. If trade 
declines they can retire from business and live upon 
their means. But the decline of trade means loss of 
employment to the labourer, and upon him will fall 
with maximum intensity the bitter consequences of 
industrial depression. 

There is one other consideration which, if the House 
will allow me, I will present to them for a moment. 
Now that the artisans of this country have happily 
been enfranchised, if you once concede their demand 
for a Nine Hours Bill, where is this legislation to stop ? 
Beckless pledges and high expectations will be held out 
to them, and at the coming election we shall see with 
what eagerness and avidity candidates will rush in 
and pledge themselves in favour of a Nine Hours Bill. 
Can there be any security that we shall stop there ? 
Why, what security can we have that we shall not 
next have an Eight Hours Bill ? Some operatives 
came to me the other day and said : "If you don't 
give up your opposition we will demand an Eight 
Hours Bill." "Well," I said, "you will not stop there. 
Of course you will demand a Seven Hours Bill." En- 
courage these demands and what shall we see ? We 
shall see the industry of this country, we shall see 
the self-reliance and independence of its people, put 
up to a demoralizing Dutch auction of degrading pro- 
mises and delusive pledges. 

I have opposed this bill in the interests of the 



144 THE NINE HOURS BILL. 

working classes. I ask the House to reject this mea- 
sure so far as it applies to the labour of adults, because 
I believe that at the present moment we can render 
no greater service to the working classes of this country 
than firmly to check the growing tendency which there 
is for them to rely upon State intervention. If we 
encourage this tendency, step by step we shall so 
enervate them, that at last they will come to us like 
helpless children and ask us to be their guardians, 
to say what wages they shall receive, what time they 
shall go to bed, and to prevent them doing a hundred 
things which they know they ought not to do. I 
entreat the House to remember this: that it is not 
by the act of the despot alone that liberty is de- 
stroyed. That vigour of national life, which is the only 
guarantee for freedom, must inevitably decline, if the 
Government is permitted to envelope the people in a 
great network of officialism. I believe the day is not 
far distant when, if we are not very careful, the labour- 
ing classes of this country will find from bitter experi- 
ence that their worst enemy is not the so-called cold- 
blooded economist, but that they have infinitely more 
to fear from a misguided benevolence and a mistaken 
and meddlesome philanthropy. 



ELECTION EXPENSES. 

SECOND BEADING OF THE PAKLIAMENTABY 
ELECTION EXPENSES BILL, June 18,. 1873. 



Although this bill contains principles of the greatest 
importance, yet its provisions are so simple that I think 
I shall be able to explain them in a very few sentences. 
The bill proposes, in the first place, to make candi- 
dates at elections no longer liable for the necessary 
election expenses, but to transfer that liability to 
the locality ; in the next place, it provides a security 
against vexatious candidatures. After considerable 
reflection it appears to me that the best way to pro- 
tect constituencies against vexatious and unnecessary 
candidatures, is to make each candidate who does not 
secure a reasonable amount of support liable for his 
share of the expenses, just in the same way as he is 
under the existing law. Opinions may of course differ 
as to what should be considered a reasonable amount 
of support. In this bill I have put it at one-fifth of 
the whole number of the electors polled, thinking 
that if a candidate does not obtain so much support 
as this, he can have had no reasonable chance of 
success, and therefore it would be unfair that he should 

F. S. 10 



146 ELECTION EXPENSES. 

be able to throw upon the constituency his share of 
the expenses, when very probably his chief motive in 
going to the poll was, by gaining a little notoriety, 
to gratify his personal vanity. If it is thought that 
the proportion of one-fifth is too high, I shall have no 
objection whatever to make it one-sixth, one-seventh, 
or one-eighth. Having given this brief explanation 
of the provisions of the bill, I will proceed to consider 
the chief arguments which will probably be urged 
against it. First and foremost it will no doubt be 
contended that it would be unfair and impolitic to 
throw any new charge on the rates until the whole 
question of local taxation has been settled. The same 
argument was urged last Wednesday in opposition 
to a measure for the abolition of tolls on bridges in 
Scotland, but the House arrived at the conclusion that 
the imposition of a new charge on the rates ought not 
to stand in the way of a necessary reform. It seems 
to me, however, that the present position of the ques- 
tion of local taxation, instead of suggesting a reason 
for not proceeding with this bill, provides a most 
conclusive argument in favour of considering the mea- 
sure on its merits. The subject of local taxation has 
been forced into the prominent position it now occupies 
because there are many who think that certain local 
charges ought to be defrayed out of imperial funds. 
Although I do not sympathize with these opinions, 
yet it appears to me that those who hold them should 
be the first to recognize the fact that even from their 
point of view it is of the utmost importance that before 
the bargain between imperial and local finance is 
finally adjusted, we should arrive as far as possible 



ELECTION EXPENSES. 147 

at a definite conclusion as to what ought and what 
ought not to be considered local charges. "Without 
such information the problem of local taxation cannot 
be solved. How can the amount of assistance which 
ought to be given from imperial to local funds be 
determined, if it is undecided whether or not certain 
charges shall be thrown upon local taxation ? Suppose 
the passing of this bill is deferred until after the 
subject of local taxation has been settled. Would not 
the hon. baronet the member for South Devon (Sir 
Massey Lopes) and those who act with him be placed 
in this unfortunate and unfair position ? They would 
suddenly find that immediately after a certain amount 
of assistance had been given from imperial funds to 
local finance, a new charge was thrown upon the 
rates. Would they not then be able to say : "We 
ought to have had warning of what was going to be 
done ; we might have got better terms when arranging 
the bargain, if we had been told of this new local 
charge " ? But when it is borne in mind how insignifi- 
cant is the charge which this bill throws upon the 
rates, — it has been calculated it would only take l-|e#. 
from the occupier of a £10 house once in three years — 
I really feel that an apology is due to hon. members 
for having made these remarks on local taxation. 
I would not have done so did I not know that this 
cry about local taxation and addition to rates is likely 
to exercise no inconsiderable influence on the division. 
I am almost afraid that the Government, on the 
miserable plea that the question of local taxation has 
not been settled, will refuse on the present occasion 
to support this bill, although they were responsible 

10—2 



148 ELECTION EXPENSES. 

for its introduction last year 1 . Never perhaps was the 
levy of ^d. a year from a £10 ratepayer made to do 
such efficient service as it has in reference to this 
measure. Again and again has it been said that its 
principle is indisputably just, but any addition to the 
rates is so unpopular in the constituencies that no 
vote would be likely to do so much to endanger a 
member's seat as one given in favour of this bill. I 
cannot help feeling that some of those who talk in 
this way are really speaking six words for themselves 
and one for those whom they represent. For, after 
all, is there any evidence that the bill is unpopular ? 
Can there not, on the contrary, be adduced the 
strongest evidence of its popularity? It has now been 
six years before the House, and, so far as I am 
aware, a petition has never been presented against 
it. Not only has no resolution ever been passed at a 
public meeting against it, but large and influential 
public meetings in every part of the country have 
again and again appealed to Parliament to pass this 
bill. Perhaps, however, the strongest evidence that 
can be adduced in favour of its general popularity is 
the almost unprecedented unanimity with which it has 
been supported by every section of the Press. When 
the proposal was last before the House, I believe, with 
the exception of the Morning Post, every paper in 
London, both daily and weekly, wrote strongly hi its 
favour. Facts such as these are sufficient to prove 
that the bill is certainly far from being unpopular in 

1 From a Speech made on behalf of the Government by the Home 
Secretary (Mr Bruce), in a subsequent part of the debate, it was shewn that 
this surmise was correct. 



ELECTION EXPENSES. 149 

the constituencies. But the weapon of attack upon 
which the opponents of the measure place their chief 
reliance is to conjure up the prospect of every seat 
being scrambled for by a great number of fictitious 
candidates, who, although they have not the slightest 
chance of being returned, gladly avail themselves of 
an opportunity of securing a certain amount of notoriety 
at other peoples' expense. Far from the measure, how- 
ever, being likely to produce this effect, I think I shall 
be able to shew that it must exert an exactly opposite 
influence. It has been often pointed out that the 
greatest advantage the bill would secure is, that, so 
far as electoral expenditure is concerned, it would cause 
the constituencies to have a direct interest in economy, 
whereas under the present system, the more extrava- 
gance there is, the greater is the amount of money 
distributed amongst them. We all know that under 
the existing state of things, it not unfrequently hap- 
pens that the majority of a constituency is perfectly 
well satisfied with the sitting members, but as the 
time for the election arrives, the chance of there being 
no contest arouses to unwonted activity the election- 
eering agents, the attorneys, the paid canvassers, the 
printers, the newspaper proprietors, — in fact, the whole 
electioneering crew to whom an election contest is a 
harvest of gain. No stone is left unturned to bring 
about the desired result. The sitting members are 
attacked in the local press. Adverse rumours are cir- 
culated against them ; and all this is done, if not with 
the distinct approval, at any rate with the tacit con- 
nivance of the constituency, for it is known that an 
election contest means an expenditure of, perhaps, 



150 ELECTION EXPENSES. 

£10,000, and the feeling naturally spreads that such 
a lavish outlay must be good for the trade of the place. 
Is it not, however, perfectly certain that if candidates 
no longer bore the necessary expenses of elections, that 
instead of unnecessary contests being thus encouraged, 
the public opinion of a constituency would be actively 
exerted to discourage them ? Would not the election- 
eering agents, and others who try to get up a contest 
to put money into their own pockets, be very quickly 
told that it was too bad of them, in order to gain 
something themselves, to throw a quite unnecessary 
charge upon the rates ? In fact, what occurs now and 
what would occur if this bill became law can be stated 
in a single sentence. The promoter of an unnecessary 
contest is now regarded as a benefactor to the con- 
stituency ; he would then have to bear the obloquy 
of wishing to tax the ratepayers in order to obtain 
some money for himself. 

But the consideration to which I wish most par- 
ticularly to direct the attention of the House is this : 
I will ask honourable members whether they can view 
without alarm the increasing tendency there is at the 
present time to make elections more and more ex- 
pensive. If something is not promptly done to check 
this tendency, it will soon come to pass that scarcely 
any one will obtain' a seat unless he is able and will- 
ing to squander many thousands in an election con- 
test. Under such circumstances this House cannot be 
a truly national Parliament. It will gradually be- 
come an assembly where none but the rich can enter ; 
and a severe blow will then have been struck, not only 
at the efficiency, but at the permanence of representa- 



ELECTION EXPENSES. 151 

tive. Government in this country. Perhaps at no time 
in our political history has it been of so much import- 
ance that no unnecessary barrier should be thrown in 
the way of those who are not rich obtaining seats in 
this House. It can scarcely be doubted, by even the 
most casual observer of the signs of the times, that 
the questions which are most likely to engage the 
attention of Parliament during the next few years are 
those which may be regarded as social and economic, 
rather than political. From one end of the country 
to the other a great struggle between capital and 
labour is going on, and this contest must sooner or 
later make itself felt in this House. "When we have 
to discuss the relations between capital and labour, 
it is of quite as much consequence to the capitalist 
as it is to the labourer that labour as well as capital 
should be represented. Although I am quite ready 
to admit that this bill has hitherto been too much 
discussed as if its main object was to facilitate the 
entrance of working men into Parliament, and although 
I am also ready to admit that the influence it will 
exert in this direction has been much exaggerated both 
by its friends and its opponents, yet I think it is 
almost impossible to overestimate the advantage of 
passing this bill, before those social and economic 
questions come on for discussion in which the working 
classes are specially interested. Honourable members 
should remember, whatever may be their own opinions 
on the subject, that the workmen consider they have 
no reasonable chance of securing a due representation of 
labour until this bill is passed. It should further be 
considered that the present system not only excludes 



152 ELECTION EXPENSES. 

workmen from Parliament, but it is suggested that 
this is the motive which prompts many in this House 
to oppose the bill. Any legislation, therefore, which 
particularly affects the working classes, will, under the 
present state of things, be looked on with suspicion 
and distrust. Depend upon it, although we may be 
actuated by the purest and most disinterested mo- 
tives, although the measures we may pass, in which 
capital and labour are concerned, may be the justest 
and the wisest, yet our intentions will be suspected 
and the measures themselves will be robbed of half 
the influence for good they might produce, as long 
as the working classes are able to say, " Our interests 
are legislated for by an assembly from which we are 
purposely excluded, because expenses are thrown upon 
us which we cannot afford to pay." It has been some- 
times said that even if this bill were passed not a 
single workman would be returned to Parliament. I, 
of course, cannot say whether this would or would 
not be the case ; but even if it could be known 
that not a single workman would be returned, it 
certainly would not alter my opinion as to the im- 
portance of passing this bill. We could then no longer 
be accused by the working classes of intentionally 
maintaining a system with the view of excluding 
them from Parliament, but, on the contrary, we 
should be able to say, " You have no longer any 
reason to distrust or to suspect us ; we have done 
all that we can to facilitate your entrance into this 
House ; we have removed from your path the impe- 
diments which the law had created ; and if you have 
returned none of your own class to represent you, 



ELECTION EXPENSES. 153 

you alone are responsible, we at least cannot be 
blamed." 

There is, however, another aspect in which the 
increasing costliness of elections can be viewed, which 
certainly suggests some very grave considerations. It 
is not difficult to indicate the causes which each year 
render it more and more difficult for those who are 
not rich to follow a Parliamentary life. In the first 
place, the greater part of the small boroughs have 
been abolished ; secondly, the extension of the suf- 
frage has increased the number of electors in each 
constituency ; thirdly, as the small boroughs are abo- 
lished, more power is concentrated upon the large 
constituencies. In thus alluding to these changes, I 
trust I shall not be misunderstood. Far from regret- 
ting them, I look upon them as important and neces- 
sary reforms. It seems to me, however, peculiarly to 
be the duty of our statesmen to see, when a new 
and better state of things has been called into exist- 
ence, whether there may not be associated with the 
improvement some disadvantage which ought as far 
as possible to be removed or counteracted. There is 
another circumstance which, during the last few years, 
has exerted an exceptional influence in increasing the 
cost of elections. Never before has there been such 
commercial activity. Vast fortunes have been accu- 
mulated with unprecedented rapidity. One of the 
first things that a man thinks of in this country, when 
he becomes the possessor of two or three hundred 
thousand pounds, is to try to obtain a seat in this 
House. He supposes that if he can write M.P. after his 
name, his social position is improved. What is the 



154 ELECTION EXPENSES. 

inevitable result ? The number of seats in this House 
is limited. We therefore have an article the supply 
of which cannot be augmented, and the demand for 
which is constantly increasing. Not only each year 
does it happen that there is a greater number of peo- 
ple willing to purchase the article, but they can afford 
to pay for it a higher price. Under these circum- 
stances, it is just as certain that the cost of becom- 
ing a member of Parliament will advance as it is that 
the price of any ordinary article of merchandise will 
increase, if, whilst its supply remains fixed, the de- 
mand for it is constantly becoming greater. I hope 
it will not be supposed that I object to this grow- 
ing trade prosperity. I have only referred to it in 
order to shew all the tendencies of the age seem to 
bring home to us the importance of calling into ope- 
ration any agency which is likely to promote eco- 
nomy at elections. Let me, before leaving this branch 
of the subject, ask the House for one moment to 
consider how we shall in future be able to obtain that 
administrative capacity which is the surest mark of 
true statesmanship, if seats in this House are chiefly 
to be secured by successful men of business. If a 
man enters Parliament at forty-five or fifty, his ener- 
gies up to that time having been mainly absorbed in 
amassing wealth, is it not unreasonable to suppose 
that he possesses either the inclination or the requi- 
site training to become an able administrator ? If we 
look along the Treasury Bench, does not the exam- 
ple of the Prime Minister and others shew, that those 
who are most competent to deal with complicated and 
difficult questions are those who have been able to 



ELECTION EXPENSES. 155 

enter Parliament without staying to spend some of 
the best years of their life in acquiring a fortune ? 
Having now stated some of the leading arguments in 
favour of the bill, I will say a few words in antici- 
pation of one remark which, I doubt not, will be made 
in the course of the present debate. I shall in all 
probability be told that I have been ill-advised in 
again bringing forward this measure in the face of 
certain defeat ; but had I been deterred by fear of 
defeat, I should scarcely have ever introduced any 
measure into this House. The chief use of an inde- 
pendent member is to bring into notice the views of 
a minority, and, gradually obtain a sufficient amount 
of public opinion in support of a question, to secure 
its ultimate success. The measure which is now be- 
fore the House has certainly had a somewhat chequered 
career. Six years ago I endeavoured to effect the 
object sought to be obtained by introducing a clause 
into the Corrupt Practices Act of the late Conserva- 
tive Government, and the proposal was carried by a 
majority of eight on one occasion and nine on ano- 
ther. On the report of the bill, the leader of the 
Conservative party (Mr Disraeli), taking the House 
by surprise, succeeded in throwing out the clause by 
a majority of twelve. On the third reading of the 
bill I again raised the question, and was then defeated 
by only a small majority. This occurred just on the 
eve of the general election. Directly the new Parlia- 
ment met, I again brought forward the subject by 
introducing a bill almost exactly similar to the one 
which is now before the House. The division on the 
second reading took place quite at the commencement 



156 ELECTION EXPENSES. 

of the session. It was, I believe, the first occasion 
on which there was a division in the present Parlia- 
ment. The bill was then only rejected in a full House 
by the narrow majority of three. It is to be parti- 
cularly noted that although the Government nomi- 
nally supported the bill, yet they were responsible 
for its defeat. All the members of the Government 
except three were absent from the division. When 
they are really interested in some question, when, 
for instance, they want to enclose some open space, 
when they wish to rob the poor man of his common, 
when they are anxious to squander public money, 
again and again have we seen that not three but 
thirty members of the Government go into the divi- 
sion lobby. Being unfortunately of too unsuspecting 
a disposition, I was not warned as I ought to have 
been by this occurrence, but in a too confiding mo- 
ment I entrusted the measure to the Government. 
Whether the atmosphere which surrounds the Trea- 
sury bench was too enervating for its constitution, I 
cannot say, but since the bill has been under the 
care of the Government it has been defeated by a 
majority of ninety. We all know that, valuable as 
the support of a Government is when they are in 
earnest, they can, more effectually perhaps than any 
one else, kill a measure by half-hearted support. The 
honourable member for Shaftesbury (Mr Glyn) has 
usually to act the part of a foster-parent to proposals 
brought forward by the Government ; but with regard 
to this particular question, instead of performing his 
paternal functions, he has rather imitated the exam- 
ple of the wicked uncle whom we all remember in 



ELECTION EXPENSES. 157 

the nursery tale of the Babes in the Wood. Under 
these circumstances, I trust the House will not think 
me rash in again taking the bill under my charge, 
in the hope that it will regain health and strength 
in the more bracing atmosphere of independence. If 
as large a majority should vote against it as when it 
was in the hands of the Government, I shall simply 
conclude that its constitution is still weak; I shall 
not at any rate be so unkind as to abandon it, feel- 
ing it more incumbent on me than ever to try to 
restore it to its former health and strength. 

It is sometimes said that there is not now 
so much need for this bill as there was before the 
Ballot Act was passed. I trust the fond hopes of 
those will be realized who think that the Ballot will 
prove a death-blow to political corruption. I believe, 
however, that electoral corruption will continue to 
thrive in full vigour, until a fundamental change is 
effected in the relations between members of Parlia- 
ment and those whom they represent. So long as 
the sentiment is encouraged that a seat in this House 
is a privilege for which a high price can be legiti- 
mately asked, the more wealthy the country becomes, 
the more actively will Parliamentary honours be com- 
peted for, the more money will be squandered in elec- 
tions, and the more will corruption flourish. Are we 
not giving the most effective sanction in our power 
to the theory that a constituency confers a favour on 
its representative, if we persist in maintaining a sys- 
tem which renders him, and not the constituency, 
liable for the necessary expenses incurred in enabling 
it to exercise its choice? If a Poor Law Guardian, 



158 ELECTION EXPENSES. 

Town Councillor, or a member of a School-Board has 
to be elected, the locality, and not the candidate, 
bears the necessary expenses of the election. There 
cannot be any guarantee either for electoral purity or 
for the efficiency of representative institutions, as long 
as constituencies think that so great a favour is con- 
ferred upon a representative that he can be fairly 
subjected to a heavy pecuniary fine. This measure, 
if it were passed, would exercise a not unimportant 
influence in securing a more general recognition of the 
fact, that a member, if he serves his constituents faith- 
fully, discharges a most difficult and onerous duty, and 
that it is even more unreasonable to make him pay 
for performing this duty than it would be to expect 
the labourer to work without wages. Believing that 
this bill would at least do something to place the 
relations between members and their constituents on 
a more just and satisfactory basis, I would, even if 
there were no other reason in its favour, most ear- 
nestly commend it to the favourable consideration of 
the House and the country. 



WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 

SECOND BEADING OF THE WOMEN'S DISABILITIES 
BILL, May, 1873. 



As my name is appended to the petition in favour 
of this bill, from resident members of the University 
of Cambridge, which has been so pointedly alluded to 
by the junior member for the University (Mr Beresford 
Hope), I trust the House will allow me to make a few 
remarks. He seems to think that the petition loses 
much of its weight because it was forwarded to him 
by a lady. I believe I have authority to state that 
there is not a single gentleman who signed that peti- 
tion who is not perfectly satisfied with the manner 
in which it has been forwarded to the hon. gentleman. 
The lady from whom he seems to object to have re- 
ceived it, is not only hon. secretary of the London 
Society for Women's Suffrage, she is also a daughter 
of one of the most distinguished resident members 
of the University. We therefore felt that there was 
no one to whom the petition could be more properly 
entrusted. I have only one other remark to make in 
reference to his speech. He says that if women had 
votes they would be withdrawn from their domestic 
duties, and that it would be impossible for them to 
devote the time necessary to enable them to study 



160 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 

public questions. Now, in the name of common sense, 
does he wish us to believe that every man who has 
a vote is drawn away from the pursuits . of his life 
and from his ordinary daily labour, that an artisan 
working in a mill, a barrister practising in court, a 
doctor attending his patients, cannot properly study 
public questions without neglecting his ordinary em- 
ployment. Allow me upon this subject to repeat an 
anecdote which was related to me a few minutes ago 
by an hon. member sitting near me, who represents 
a northern borough. It will shew that the male 
electors who have votes, are not always, even in their 
leisure moments, engaged in studying public affairs, 
but that they sometimes occupy themselves with much 
less honourable pursuits. I think that the anecdote 
will forcibly illustrate the injustice of the present 
system. My hon. friend told me that at a recent 
election, when he was canvassing the borough he 
represents, he, and a distinguished member of this 
House, who was then his colleague, in endeavouring 
to find two of the electors they wished to canvass, 
discovered them sotting in a public house. In fact 
they were drunk, and were certainly hot devoting their 
leisure moments to the study of politics. After my 
hon. friend had had an interview with his two drunken 
constituents, and was leaving them, a woman came 
out of her house and said, "I have paid rates for 
twenty years. How can you say that I ought not 
to have a vote when you have just been soliciting the 
votes of these two drunken men?" "Well," my hon. 
friend said, "I think what you say is very reasonable," 
and ever since then he has been a consistent supporter 



WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 161 

of this bill. I wish now, in a few words, to refer 
to the speech of the right hon. gentleman the 
Home Secretary (Mr Bruce). I am not going to be 
drawn into a discussion as to the relative ability of 
men and women. It is not necessary in order to 
justify our support of this bill to assert that men 
and women are intellectually equal in all respects. 
Nobody can decide the point until the experiment 
has been fairly tried, and it never yet has been fairly 
tried. Give women the same opportunities for in- 
tellectual development as men, and then, and not 
till then, shall we be able to say what they can do. 
I was certainly astonished to hear the Home Secretary 
say that no woman had ever been a great painter. 
Does he forget Rosa Bonheur ? He said further, that 
no woman had ever been a great musical composer. 
He is not perhaps aware of a story that shews that 
women do not always receive their due deserts. 
Women do their work quietly, and many a man who 
has attained great success would never have filled 
so distinguished a position if it had not been that 
some woman had helped him. Upon this very question 
of musical composition it appears from Mendelssohn's 
correspondence that one of the most admired pieces 
attributed to Mendelssohn was entirely the composition 
of his sister. That great composer also admitted that 
she had helped him in his other works to an extent 
which he could not describe. I must confess that the 
Home Secretary astonished me very considerably by 
going into an historical argument, in which he seemed 
to think that he had discovered, as a reason why 
women should not have votes, that it was men who 
f. s. 11 



162 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 

invaded England at the Norman Conquest, and that 
it was the barons who obtained Magna Charta from 
King John. If this argument is worth anything it 
certainly amounts to this, that no one should have 
votes except those who have invaded England or those 
who have succeeded in humbling the power of the 
Crown. Repeating the argument of the right hon. 
member for Kilmarnock (Mr Bouverie), the Home 
Secretary said, the great objection to the bill of my 
hon. friend was that if it were carried it would ulti- 
mately lead to the giving of votes to married women 
and to women taking seats in this house. Before I 
reply to that argument let me say that it is an old 
one. Never was there a great change proposed, or a 
great measure of reform brought forward, but that 
some "bogey" was immediately called up to alarm and 
terrify us. When Catholic emancipation was proposed 
and it was advocated that Catholics should have seats 
in this House, one of the favourite arguments of the 
opponents of the proposal was, that if Catholics were 
admitted to this House there was no reason why a 
Catholic should not sit upon the throne. One of the 
favourite arguments used by the opponents of house- 
hold suffrage was, that if household suffrage were 
granted there was only one other step, and that was 
manhood suffrage. We have not been frightened by 
arguments such as these, but it seems to me that the 
Home Secretary and Mr Bouverie are indulging in 
doctrines which are dangerous, when they argue as if 
property is no longer to be the basis of the quali- 
fication for a vote in this country. Mr Bouverie 
quoted with commendation a saying of the democratic 



WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 163 

Benjamin Franklin, that it is idle to suppose that 
property possesses the exclusive right to the franchise. 
Without presuming too confidently to predict what 
will happen, I have no hesitation in saying that these 
words of the right hon. gentleman the member for 
Kilmarnock will next Easter Monday be quoted with 
rapturous applause, when 60,000 men again gather 
together on the Town Moor at Newcastle to demand 
manhood suffrage. There is no logical reason why 
married women should not have votes if you demand 
manhood suffrage. But we who support this bill do 
not wish to declare that we desire that the franchise 
should be based upon any other condition than that 
which it is based upon at the present moment, namely, 
property. Unless a woman can obtain a vote by pro- 
perty we do not wish to do anything either to admit 
her or to exclude her. If you throw this argument of 
property aside, you will be lending assistance to the 
agitation in favour of manhood suffrage, a course which 
I believe you will heartily repent. I wish now, as 
briefly as possible, to go through the leading arguments 
which have been advanced in the debate upon this 
bill. The reasons in its favour have been stated so 
often, and I am so anxious to occupy as little as possible 
of the time of the House, that it appears to me to 
be the fairer course to deal with the arguments; against 
rather than with those in favour of the bill. The first 
argument is that the majority of women do not ask 
for this bill, and that a great number of them are 
opposed to it. If this bill contemplated making a 
woman vote who did not wish to vote, it would not 
find a more resolute opponent in this House than 

11—2 



164 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 

myself. But when you say that a majority of women 
are opposed to it, I say that it is impossible to prove 
it ; and I say further, that the same argument in 
an analogous case you did not accept as conclusive. 
I remember perfectly well, when I first came into 
this House, that I heard it stated again and again 
that the majority of the working classes of this country 
were not in favour of the extension of the suffrage. 
It was said that it was only the active politicians 
among them, just as it is now said that it is only the 
active women agitators who are in favour of this bill. 
Now, what do we observe ? No doubt it never could 
be proved that a majority of the working classes were 
in favour of the extension of the suffrage, any more 
than it can be proved now that a majority of the 
agricultural labourers are in favour of household suf- 
frage in counties ; and yet it was again and again stated 
that the majority of the working classes were in favour 
of household suffrage. The House soon after that re- 
cognized the justice of the claim for an extension of the 
suffrage to the artisan class. But the argument which 
no doubt produced the most influence on the House is 
this, that at the present time the interests of women 
are far better looked after by men than they would 
be looked after by themselves ; and it is said by the 
Home Secretary that if you could only prove to him 
that women's questions of a vitally interesting nature 
were treated with injustice in this House, it would be 
a conclusive argument in favour of voting for the bill. 
Nothing could be further from my mind than to accuse 
this House of consciously doing anything which is 
unjust or wrong to women, but women and men may 



WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 165 

have very different views of what is best for women ; 
and our position is this, that according to the generally 
accepted principles of representative government it is 
only fair that women should be able to give expression 
to their wishes on measures likely to affect their in- 
terests. Take for instance the case of educational 
endowments. The Endowed Schools Commissioners 
have again and again said that the feeling they find 
prevalent in towns is, that educational endowments 
should be so used that the wants of every boy should 
be satisfied before any attention is paid to the wants 
of girls. What right have we to suppose that this 
is the opinion of women on this subject, considering 
their enthusiasm for education ? What right have we 
to suppose that if they could exercise power in this 
House they would not demand an equal share in the 
educational endowments of the country ? I wish to 
direct the attention of the House to what seems to 
me a most important argument on this subject. 
Hitherto the question has been treated too much as 
if it simply concerned women of property. Now, you 
say that men can be safely entrusted to legislate for 
women — that men can be safely entrusted in the 
constituencies to represent the wants of women. Any 
one who studies the industrial history of the country — 
any one who looks to what trades' unions have done— 
cannot for a moment believe in this conclusion. What 
are the arguments in favour of trades' unions ? I am 
not opposed to trades' unions. One of the first 
speeches I ever made was in their favour, but at the 
same time I do not conceal their defects. It has been 
again and again asserted that without the power of 



166 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 

combining in trades' unions it would be impossible 
for workmen to obtain a proper reward for their labour, 
and that it would be impossible to secure their just 
rights. This is their deliberate conviction asserted 
a thousand times over. But how often have they 
admitted a woman to these trades' unions ? They have 
almost invariably excluded women ; although they say 
that without these combinations it is impossible for 
labour to obtain its just reward, they take very good 
care to exclude women from them. I have known, 
on several occasions, when a trades' union has orga- 
nized a strike, that when the women who had had 
no voice in deciding upon the strike shewed themselves 
anxious to take advantage of the labour market, the 
trades' unionists stood outside the shops to keep 
women away from doing the work that was offered 
to them. What took place in the Potteries ? It is 
perfectly well known that for years and years men 
were so jealous of the competition of women labourers 
that they made it a rule in the trades' union that 
the whole force of the union should be used to pre- 
vent women from using the hand-rest which the men 
invariably avail themselves of, and which greatly 
facilitates the rapidity and precision of the work. 
Let us look to our legislation for the future, and I 
ask the House calmly to consider whether, looking 
at some of the measures likely to be brought for- 
ward, it is not of essential importance that we should 
take the opinion of women upon them. Probably 
there is no social measure affecting the manufactur- 
ing districts which is of so much interest at the 
present time as the Nine Hours Bill, introduced by 



WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 167 

the honourable member for Sheffield (Mr Mundella). 
I have no doubt that the honourable member has 
introduced that bill with the purest motives ; it is 
a bill that affects vitally the interests of the unrepre- 
sented classes. Now what is this bill ? It is a bill 
that limits the labour of women to nine hours a day. 
What must be the inevitable result of that bill ? It 
must do one of two things — either impose a legislative 
limit of nine hours a day over all the country, and 
in that case it ought to be called a general Nine Hours 
Bill, or it must inevitably place the most serious 
restrictions and impediments upon the employment 
of women. For how can a manufacturer, unless he 
employs women on the principle of half-time, say that 
directly the nine hours are up, every woman must 
leave, and then let the mill go on working for another 
hour or two without a woman being employed? The 
inevitable result will be to place grievous impediments 
in the way of the employment of women, and before 
we sanction such a measure it certainly seems to me 
that women should be consulted. I am bound in 
candour to say — I don't know whether the sentiment is 
popular or not — that, looking to the past industrial 
history of the country, and seeing what the trades' 
unionists have sometimes done to women, I am not 
certain that there is not at the bottom of the move- 
ment a feeling which is prompted by the jealousy of 
men with regard to the labour of women. But there 
is an argument, perhaps not avowed in this House, 
that is, nevertheless, producing a great influence upon 
the Liberal members, and it is one to which I wish 
particularly to direct the attention of honourable 



168 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 

members. I have heard it said again and again, by 
Liberal friends of mine, that they cannot vote for this 
bill because they think one of its consequences would 
be to hinder the disestablishment of the Church. 
They are of opinion that the majority of women are 
opposed to disestablishment, and that if this bill is 
passed it will put back that question fifty years. I 
am anxious to speak on this subject, because I am 
now and I have always been in favour of disestablish- 
ment. But although these are my sentiments, it cer- 
tainly seems to me to be an injustice of the grossest 
possible kind if we for one moment sanction the ex- 
clusion of women simply because we feel that they 
are so much in favour of the continuance of the Church 
that if they could exercise their vote the establishment 
of the Church would continue. Would it not be an 
injustice, almost amounting to a fraud, if the Church 
were disestablished on the plea that just a bare ma- 
jority of the electors were in favour of disestablishment, 
when, at the same time, we believe that the feeling of 
women in favour of establishment is so great that the 
majority of the men would represent only a minority 
of the whole nation, and that taking men and women 
together the majority is not in favour of disestablish- 
ment but of establishment ? It may of course be said 
that in some questions the oj)inion of men is more 
important than that of women, and that the opinion 
of 100,000 men in favour of a particular proposal re- 
presents more weight than the opinion of 100,000 
women against it. But can you say this with regard 
to such a question as the Church, or the question of 
the Nine Hours Bill, or others I might enumerate ? 



WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 169 

Surely you cannot say it with regard to the Church, 
for the spiritual welfare of women is of just as much 
importance as the spiritual welfare of men, and in a 
question whether the Church should be continued 
as an established Church or not the opinion of women 
ought to exercise as much influence as the opinion of 
men. We ought to endeavour to trace out what is 
the effect of the Church establishment upon the great 
mass of the people, and to whom would you go to 
obtain this opinion ? It seems to me that if I wished 
to ascertain what is the effect which the Church is 
producing at the present time I should go to those 
who are most practically acquainted with its working — 
those who see most clearly its influence among the 
poor — and I believe they are women and not men. 
Now, however much I may be in favour of disestablish- 
ment, it seems to me that to exclude women from the 
vote, simply because we think it would delay the 
reform we desire, is sanctioning a principle which is 
essentially unfair, essentially unjust; and is quite as 
unreasonable as if the Church party were to try to 
disfranchise the Nonconformists because the Noncon- 
formists have tried to disestablish them. 

Again, those who oppose this bill cannot rest the 
exclusion of women upon the ground that they are 
unfit intellectually for the franchise. Last year this 
House did that which shewed conclusively that no in- 
tellectual qualification is required of the male electors. 
We cast to the winds the idea of anything like intel- 
lectual fitness when we were occupied night after night 
in elaborating various schemes for securing the repre- 
sentation of the illiterate voter. It is evident, I think, 



170 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 

that " coming events cast their shadows before." I 
infer from the speech of the Home Secretary that the 
Government are about to join the Liberal members at 
this end of the House in support of the bill of my 
honourable friend the member for the Border Boroughs 
(Mr Trevelyan) in favour of giving the agricultural 
labourer a vote. But if we enfranchise the agricultural 
labourer, and refuse to give a vote to women, we shall 
be landed in this dilemma ; — we shall declare that 
although the labourer, however ignorant, ought to 
have a vote, no woman, however intellectual, ought 
to enjoy it. 

I will in conclusion allude to one circumstance 
which, no doubt, has greatly prejudiced this bill. It 
has so happened that my honourable friend the member 
for Manchester (Mr Jacob Bright) has been identified 
with another agitation, and it has also happened that 
many persons who are advocates of this bill outside 
this House have also been identified with that agitation 
in favour of the repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts. 
It appears to me singularly unfair to let such a con- 
sideration as this in the least degree influence our 
decision. It would be just as unfair as it would be 
to let our decision be influenced on any question that 
can be brought forward by my honourable friend the 
member for Carlisle (Sir Wilfrid Lawson), because he 
happens to be identified with the Permissive Bill. I 
can only say that many of those who support this bill 
differ fundamentally from the views held by the 
honourable member for Manchester in reference to the 
repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts ; and many of 
those who are the strongest advocates of the Women's 



WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE. 171 

Disabilities Bill outside the House are also opposed 
to the manner in which the agitation against the Con- 
tagious Diseases Acts has been conducted. Now I 
will only say in reply to the argument of the right 
honourable member for Kilmarnock that he seems to 
think that those who support this bill wish to make 
women less womanly. If the right honourable gentle- 
man can convince me that giving them a vote would 
make them in any respect less womanly, or men less 
manly, I would immediately vote against the bill. He 
concluded by quoting a sentence from Addison, in 
which he says that the glory of a state consists in the 
modesty of women and the courage of men. I have 
yet to learn that this bill is calculated to make women 
less modest ; and I have also yet to learn that giving 
women a vote can in the slightest degree diminish 
the courage of men. It is probable, nay, almost 
certain, that this measure will not be accepted on the 
present occasion. The feeling in its favour is however 
growing, and, if there are no more solid reasons than 
those which have been advanced against it to-day, it 
will certainly stand the trial of free discussion. It is 
possible that women exaggerate the advantages which 
the passing of this bill will confer upon them, but I 
am most firmly convinced that the other consequences 
which are attributed to it by the opponents of the 
measure are infinitely more exaggerated. 



HOUSEHOLD SUFFRAGE IN COUNTIES 

AND 

THE REDISTRIBUTION OF SEATS. 

SECOND READING OF ME TREVELYAN'S BILL FOR 

EXTENDING HOUSEHOLD SUFFRAGE TO COUNTIES. 

July 23, 1873. 

After the speech to which we have just listened from 
the Vice-President of the Council (Mr Forster) 1 , and 
after the message which has been sent to us by the 
Prime Minister, it cannot be doubted that the bill has 
been virtually taken out of the hands of my honourable 
friend the member for the Border Boroughs (Mr Tre- 
velyan), and has not only become a part of the settled 
policy of the Government, but will occupy a prominent 
position in the programme with which they will go to 
the country. The Vice-President of the Council has 
told us that he wishes it to be understood that in 
voting for the bill he votes for it as a private member, 
and not as a member of the Government. The Prime 
Minister in the message which he has addressed to 
us — and I would be the last to object to his having 
written a letter when he is prevented by illness from 

1 In the course of the debate, Mr Forster announced his intention of 
voting for the bill, and at the close of his speech he read a letter from 
Mr Gladstone stating that he should also have voted for the bill had he 
not been prevented attending the House by illness. 



HOUSEHOLD SUFFRAGE IN COUNTIES. 173 

attending the debate — evidently wishes us to believe 
that he supports the bill as member for Greenwich, 
and not as Prime Minister of England. It is impos- 
sible for the Prime Minister and one of his most in- 
fluential colleagues to vote on such a question as this 
as ordinary members of Parliament. In supporting 
the bill, they will vote for it as members of the Govern- 
ment, and henceforward it will become a Government 
measure. I need scarcely say that I rejoice at this 
result, for I seconded the motion of Mr Trevelyan when 
he brought the subject before the House last year. 
His speech has so exhaustively stated the arguments 
in favour of the principle of his bill that I would not 
trouble the House with any observations of my own 
on the present occasion, were I not anxious to point 
out the different position the bill occupies when in the 
hands of a private member, and when it has been 
adopted as a part of the Government programme. As 
long as it occupied the former position we were simply 
asked to express an opinion on the abstract question 
whether or not household suffrage ought to be ex- 
tended to the counties, but when the bill is taken up 
by the Government, it becomes a part of another great 
measure of representative reform. Within the last few 
hours a significant and memorable change has come 
over the aspect of English politics. A new Reform 
Bill is imminent, and it is impossible to exaggerate 
the importance of losing no time in considering what 
the principles of this new Reform Bill should be. 
"With regard to the question of extending household 
suffrage to the counties, I will simply say that the 
arguments in favour of such an extension appear to 



174 HOUSEHOLD SUFFRAGE IN COUNTIES AND 

me to be perfectly conclusive. When the right honour- 
able gentleman the member for Bucks (Mr Disraeli) 
by a series of the most ingenious manoeuvres led his 
party up to the acceptance of household suffrage in 
the boroughs, he probably knew better than any one 
else in the House that he had destroyed every argu- 
ment in favour of stopping there, and that household 
suffrage in the counties was simply a question of a few 
years. I am anxious to avoid entering into any in- 
vidious comparison of the character of the working 
classes in town and country. But it is not simply 
a question between the town and country labourer. 
If a town artisan by the exercise of industry and 
frugality is enabled to live in a somewhat better house 
a few miles outside the town, can any thing be more 
indefensible than that by doing so he should lose his 
vote ? In securing a healthier and better home for 
his family he surely does nothing which can suggest 
the slightest shadow of reason for depriving him of 
the franchise. Mr Trevelyan in one portion of his 
speech has admitted that if household suffrage is con- 
ceded to the counties, the 40s. freehold qualification 
is a question which must be dealt with. When speak- 
ing on this subject last year, I thought it desirable 
to point out that if there is the same household quali- 
fication in counties and boroughs, it is difficult to 
suggest any valid argument why the 405. freehold 
qualification should be maintained in its present form. 
It may of course be urged that the 405. freehold 
qualification provides some compensation for the exis- 
tence of a higher household qualification in counties. 
But if the household qualification in counties and 



THE REDISTRIB UTION OF SEA TS. 175 

boroughs is made precisely the same, why should a 
householder in the borough of Brighton, for instance, 
by the expenditure of £100 be able to obtain a vote 
for the county of Sussex, whilst a resident in Sussex 
cannot possibly obtain a vote for Brighton ? The 
county freehold qualification has no doubt many his- 
torical associations connected with it, and it would 
have been most unwise to have abolished it as long 
as a high residential qualification in counties was main- 
tained. But with household suflrage and a lodger 
franchise, almost every resident freeholder would have 
a vote from his residential qualification, and I cannot 
help believing that nothing but good would result if 
the present system of giving votes to non-resident 
freeholders were discontinued. Many most serious 
abuses are no doubt connected with it. The creation 
of faggot votes leads to many of the most demoralizing 
forms of electioneering. Rival agents vie with each 
other in resorting to all kinds of artifices to create these 
faggot votes. Again. these votes are to a great extent 
responsible for the increasing and alarming costliness 
of county elections. The non-resident voters, being 
scattered far and wide, are brought to the poll at an 
enormous expense to the unfortunate candidate. Not 
only are their travelling expenses paid, but all the 
elaborate paraphernalia of agencies and committees is 
brought into existence with lavish expense to canvass 
these non-resident voters and to secure their presence 
at the poll. Again, it certainly appears to me to be singu- 
larly unjust that a man by the expenditure of £100 
— the money often being not really his own but covertly 
supplied to him by some political association — should 



176 HOUSEHOLD SUFFRAGE IN COUNTIES AND 

be able to vote for a county with which he has not 
the slightest connection, and in which, perhaps, he 
does not spend a single hour from one election to 
the other. But I will not now pursue the subject 
further, as my chief object on the present occasion 
is not to speak of the details of the bill which is now 
before us, but I am chiefly anxious to consider the 
position of Her Majesty's Government in reference 
to the question. After what has occurred this after- 
noon the important issue which is now placed before 
us to determine is simply this : Are we going to sanc- 
tion a further great extension of the suffrage with- 
out obtaining from the Government a definite state- 
ment as to the principles which they propose should 
regulate the redistribution of political power ? In 
1867 we committed that mistake. The majority of 
this House voted for an extension of the suffrage, 
accepting with unfortunate credulity the assurance 
that the reduction of the suffrage should be followed 
by a comprehensive measure for the redistribution of 
seats. We all know how the promise then given 
has been fulfilled. The extent to which the suffrage 
was then reduced more than realized the anticipations 
of the most advanced politicians, but scarcely anything 
at all was done to redress the inequalities and anoma- 
lies in the distribution of political power. Let us be 
warned in time, and not repeat the mistake which 
was then committed. I cannot help saying that the 
conduct of the Government at the present time at any 
rate suggests the necessity of our being very cautious 
and very watchful. Long before I had any idea of 
what the Government was going to do this afternoon, 



THE REDISTRIBUTION OF SEATS. 177 

I gave notice of a motion for a Commission to inquire 
into the best mode of redressing the present inequa- 
lities in the distribution of electoral power. After 
trying in vain for many weeks to bring the motion 
on for discussion, I was fortunate enough, as I thought 
at the time, to secure the first place for it last evening. 
The Government suddenly decided, a few days since, 
to appropriate last evening to their own business, and 
thus rendered it perfectly impossible for me to get my 
motion discussed during the present session. But this 
was not all. The Prime Minister adopted the unusual 
course of not only preventing the motion coming on, 
but of announcing beforehand his determined opposi- 
tion to it. Can there be a more conclusive proof that 
the Government will do all in its power to resist any 
attempt which may be made to reopen the question of 
the redistribution of political power ? And now I will 
earnestly ask the House to consider the conduct assumed 
by the Government with regard to this branch of the 
great subject of electoral reform, and then contrast it 
with what has happened this afternoon. The Govern- 
ment, far from endeavouring to get rid of the bill we 
are now considering by appropriating to their own 
business the day for which it was fixed, is apparently 
above all things anxious to make the country under- 
stand that they are eager to grant the great extension 
of the suffrage proposed by this bill. What, then, is 
the situation in which we are landed ? Why is it not 
made perfectly clear to us that if the Government has 
its own way, that will again occur which happened in 
1867 ? We shall have another great lowering of the 
suffrage without any attempt being made to place the 

F. S. 12 



178 HOUSEHOLD SUFFRAGE IN COUNTIES AND 

distribution of political power on a more just and 
satisfactory basis. This being the case, I think it is 
only fair to the Government at once most emphatically 
to tell them, that if thev introduce a bill for the 
extension of the suffrage in counties, I will not vote 
for it unless the Government declares the principles to 
which thej propose to give effect in reference to the 
redistribution of political power. It should never be 
forgotten that there are two ways by which people can 
be deprived of representation — one, by keeping the 
right of voting from them, another, by placing them 
in so hopeless a minority that, virtually, they must be 
without representation. When the subject is regarded 
from this point of view, it is evident that a bill for the 
extension of the suffrage may be a disfranchising as 
well as an enfranchising: measure, if it concentrates 
greater power in the majority, and if we continue 
a representative system which confines political power 
solely to local majorities. I am not less anxious now 
than I always have been to give to manual labour all 
the power to which it is legitimately entitled. Manual 
labourers being a majority in the country, they ought 
to be able to secure a majority in this House. But I 
am not prepared to place the entire machinery of poli- 
tical power in their hands, without at the same time 
providing some securities that those who are not 
manual labourers, and who hold different ophiions from 
theirs, should have some chance of representation in 
the House of Commons. Those who in this country 
hold advanced opinions are prone to turn to the United 
States for political guidance, and if we do turn to 
the United States, we shall find that politicians there 



THE REDISTRIBUTION OF SEATS. 179 

of the highest character and of the highest intelligence 
almost unanimously agree that the future of their 
country in no small degree depends upon the recogni- 
tion and practical adoption of just principles of repre- 
sentation. They are beginning to perceive that a 
country may have the most democratic suffrage in the 
world, but if securities are not taken for the repre- 
sentation of minorities, that democratic suffrage, by 
centring unchecked power in the hands of a majority, 
would bring into existence many of the worst evils of 
an oligarchy. They are also beginning to recognise 
the all-important fact that true democracy consists in 
securing, as far as possible, the representation of all, and 
not simply the representation of the majority, and that 
if the most intelligent sections of opinion are unable 
to obtain representation, many of the best men in the 
country will gradually draw themselves away from 
political life, and the tone and character of the repre- 
sentative assembly steadily and surely will become 
deteriorated. All, however, that I am now saying in 
reference to the United States can be verified by what 
has lately taken place in Illinois, which is justly looked 
upon as one of the most progressive States in the 
Union. About three years since the principle of 
minority representation was introduced into Illinois, by 
the adoption of a plan of cumulative voting somewhat 
different from that which has been applied to our own 
School Board elections. The plan has been so emi- 
nently successful that Ohio and other States seem to 
be on the point of following the example of Illinois. 
The success of the plan can, however, be best described 
in the words of Mr Medill, the mayor of Chicago, who, 

12—2 



180 HOUSEHOLD SUFFRAGE IN COUNTIES AND 

be it remembered, is not a doctrinaire, as the advocates 
of minority representation in our own country are 
usually supposed to be, but who has won so high 
a position as a shrewd man of business and a practical 
politician, that when the terrible fire took place at 
Chicago, all parties united in selecting him as the one 
man likely to be the "wisest," — I quote from an 
American authority — "purest, and firmest candidate 
for the office of mayor." Mr Medill says that the 
system of minority representation which has been intro- 
duced into Illinois works to the entire satisfaction 
of the people, and "is regarded as a great improve- 
ment on the old one-sided system of representation." 
He also says, the voters " will be slow to yield back 
the cumulative vote or totality representation. The 
whole mass of the people are now represented in the 

popular branch, instead of a majority as formerly 

The stronger party at the polls have control of the 
House, but the weaker one is represented in propor- 
tion to its strength." He then observes that "it is 
a noticeable fact that, taken as a whole, the so-called 
6 minority members ' were the ablest men. Several 
of the strongest and most conspicuous members were 
sent to the Assembly by the ' plumping vote ' of the 
minority, shewing that the weaker party, as a rule, 
were more careful and conscientious in making selec- 
tions of representatives than the majority side." Mr 
Medill concludes with these very significant words : 
the only opponents the new system now has " in Illinois 
are of the Bourbon breed, who forget nothing and 
learn nothing, or the clan of Court-house partisans, who 
believe in disfranchising their political opponents from 



THE REDISTRIBUTION OF SEATS. 181 

motives of unscrupulous selfishness and narrow-minded 
^liberality." I hope to be able at some future time 
to revert to this subject, but I have thought it advisa- 
ble on the present occasion to make these remarks, in 
order to indicate to the Government why some of us 
at least will be prepared to say that, when a bill is 
introduced by the responsible Ministers of the Crown 
for carrying out so great an extension of the suffrage 
as we are now asked to sanction, they will be expected 
at the same time to consider the question of a redistri- 
bution of political power, and distinctly to let the 
country know by what principles that redistribution 
shall be regulated. We have this afternoon started 
upon a new era of representative reform. It cannot 
therefore be too earnestly insisted upon that whilst, 
on the one hand, we should endeavour to enfranchise 
all who are qualified to vote, we should, on the other 
hand, not less earnestly strive to make the English 
Parliament a truly representative assembly, in which 
every section of opinion should be duly and propor- 
tionally represented by those who are most able and 
most independent. 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. 



EXPLANATORY STATEMENT. 

During four or five successive sessions since the year 1867 I brought 
in various forms the question of Irish University Education before the 
House. A resolution was on several occasions moved affirming the de- 
sirability of abolishing all religious tests in Trinity College and the Uni- 
versity of Dublin. The first time there was a division on the resolution 
(1867) the numbers for and against it were equal, and the Speaker, 
according to precedent, gave his casting vote against the resolution. On 
this occasion Mr Gladstone abstained from taking any part in the di- 
vision. The next year, being the eve of the general election, each 
party was anxious to gain the Catholic vote, without raising Protestant 
suspicion. The day when the resolution was to have been brought 
forward, the House was counted out before the discussion began, at 
four o'clock on a Tuesday afternoon. It was said at the time that there 
were no fewer than 170 members within the precincts of the House, but 
the Whips on each side had sufficient influence to prevent the formation of 
a House. This proceeding was characterised by a high authority as a piece 
of strategy happily without precedent in the aunals of Parliament. When 
the resolution was again brought forward in 1870, Mr Gladstone, who was 
then Prime Minister, threatened to treat its passing as a vote of want of 
confidence, on the ground that he had promised to legislate on the subject 
himself, and that the resolution indicated an imperfect scheme of reform, 
it being in his opinion necessary to associate with the abolition of tests 
a scheme for the reorganization and reform of Trinity College and the 
University of Dublin. On this occasion a petition in favour of the re- 
solution was presented from the authorities of Trinity College and the 
University. Before the disestablishment of the Irish Church they 
had been in favour of the retention of religious tests, but after dis- 
establishment they felt that there was no justification for attempting 
to maintain the principle of Protestant ascendency in academic in- 
stitutions in Ireland. In 1S71 a bill of which I had charge, and which 
also bore the names of Mr Plunket (one of the members for Dublin 
University), Dr Lyon Playfair, and Lord Crichton, was brought for- 
ward. This lull proposed not only to abolish all religious tests, but, in 
order to meet Mr Gladstone's objection previously referred to, it also 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. 183 

proposed to reorganize Trinity College and the University of Dublin, and 
to vest the powers now exercised by the Provost and the seven senior 
Fellows in a new representative Council, to seats on which members of all 
religious persuasions would have been eligible ; in order to facilitate the 
immediate representation of Catholics on this Council the principle of 
cumulative voting was introduced. The tactics of delay and obstruction 
were once more resorted to ; a division on the second reading of the bill 
was avoided by talking it out on a Wednesday afternoon. This proceeding, 
if not arranged by the Government, certainly had their sanction, for the 
talk out was effected mainly through the instrumentality of their Irish 
Attorney-General, Mr Dowse. In 1872 the same bill was again introduced, 
the same members having their names on the back of it. The Government 
supported the second reading, and it was carried by a majority of four to 
one. Not long afterwards the Irish Secretary (the Marquis of Hartingtoi ) 
gave notice of his intention to move on behalf of the Government an instruc- 
tion to the committee that only that portion of the bill which referred to the 
abolition of tests should be proceeded with, and that all the remainder, 
relating to the reorganization of the Government of Trinity College and 
the University, should be abandoned. The committee on the bill was fixed 
for a Tuesday in April, and on the previous day an article, obviously 
inspired, appeared in the Dally News, in which it was stated that the 
Government would resign if Lord Hartington's instruction were defeated. 
The position of the bill was of course entirely altered by this sudden 
creation of a ministerial crisis ; it virtually destroyed all chance of the bill 
coming on for committee on Tuesday evening. Accordingly at the meeting 
of the House on Wednesday I asked Mr Gladstone whether he intended 
to give a day for the discussion of a motion which, according to the inter- 
pretation of the Government, involved a vote of confidence in his ad- 
ministration. On receiving a reply in the negative, I at once gave notice 
that I would on the next day call the attention of the House to the conduct 
of the Government ; this I was enabled to do by formally moving the 
adjournment of the House. It is unnecessary to make any further refer- 
ence to the ministerial crisis, as the circumstances connected with it are 
explained in the first of the three following speeches on Irish University 
Education. The tactics of the Government were successful, for it was soon 
proved that the threat of resignation had effectually destroyed all chance 
of bringing on the bill during that session, in the following year, 187-^, 
Irish University Education occupied a first place in the ministerial pro- 
gramme. The bill of the Government was introduced by Mr Gladstone 
a few days after the opening of Parliament, and the second reading was 
fixed for an early day in March. Unless a private member introduces 
a bill on the earliest possible day of the session he has no chance of getting 
it discussed at a convenient time. 1 therefore thought it expedient once 
more to introduce the bill of which I had charge. The promoters of the 
measure thought that if the bill of the Government should prove a satis- 
factory solution of the question we could withdraw our bill : on the other 
hand, we should be in a position to proceed with it if the scheme of the 



184 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. 

Government should be rejected. "When the day for the second reading of 
the Government bill came on, it was opposed by a resolution, moved by 
Mr Bourke and seconded by Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice, calling upon the 
Government to give a list of the names of the members of the proposed 
council of the new University. The debate on the second reading lasted four 
nights ; and as it proceeded the opponents of the ministerial scheme urged 
so many objections against it that Mr Bourke' s resolution was withdrawn 
in order that a division might be taken on the second reading. The result 
of the division was that the bill was rejected by a majority of three. The 
Government resigned ; but Mr Disraeli declining to form a Government, they 
soon returned to office. Soon after this, I ascertained that the Government 
were willing to facilitate the passing of my bill, if those who had charge 
of it consented to abandon the clauses relating to the reorganization of the 
college and University, thus making the bill simply a measure for the 
abolition of religious tests. For the reasons stated in the last of the three 
following speeches this offer was accepted ; the bill quickly passed all its 
stages in the House of Commons ; it was introduced by Lord Cairns into 
the House of Lords, where it met with no opposition, and received the 
Royal Assent early in June. It may be well to state that by this bill tests 
have been much more completely abolished at Trinity College and the 
University of Dublin than they have been at Oxford and Cambridge. At 
the English Universities clerical tests are retained, and nearly all the 
headships and a considerable number of fellowships must still be held by 
clergymen of the Church of England. In Dublin no religious disability 
whatever attaches to the Provostship or to any of the fellowships. 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. I. 

THE MINISTERIAL CRISIS, 1872. 

I can say with all sincerity, that there is no one 
in this House who can more regret than I do that 
any act of mine should tend to interfere with the 
course of public business. But I think, if honour- 
able members will listen to a very brief statement 
of what has recently occurred, they will think I am 
amply justified in pursuing my present course. The 
promoters of the Dublin University Bill are not in 
the slightest degree responsible for the present posi- 
tion of affairs. Up to Friday last that bill occupied 
in every respect identically the same position as any 
other measure introduced by a private member. We 
had no claim for exceptional treatment, and we could 
not with the slightest shew of reason have pressed 
the members of the Government to give us a night 
for its consideration. We must have taken our chance 
with other members. We should, no doubt, have done 
our best to press it forward, and if we had not suc- 
ceeded in bringing it on, reluctant though we should 
have been to drop the bill, there would have been 
no other course open to us but to submit to our fate. 
But suddenly the whole aspect of affairs wcs changed, 



186 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. I. 

and the Government, without any warning to the pro- 
moters of this bill or notice to this House, have adopted 
a course which is happily without precedent in the 
political annals of this country. Last year I intro- 
duced the same bill which is now before the House. 
It came on for discussion late in the session, and, in 
opposing it on the plea that the period was too late 
for its consideration, how was it met by the Govern- 
ment ? The Prime Minister said : — " If this bill had 
been introduced, not at the end, but at the begin- 
ning of the session, it would have been our duty" 
- — mark these words — " to introduce a measure of our 
own or else to support the bill." Well, this session 
arrived. No measure of the Government was forth- 
coming. No allusion to the question was made in 
the Queen's Speech. We again introduced the bill, 
and now we are told that we are trespassing upon 
the legitimate province of the Government. But that 
is not what we are doing. We are simply acting in 
strict accordance with the injunctions of the Govern- 
ment. We introduced this bill on the earliest possi- 
ble day, and we fixed its second reading for the first 
day we could get. And when the day for the second 
reading arrived I thought that the goal for which I 
had been striving for five years had at length been 
reached ; I thought that the Government could hot 
escape from a clear and specific declaration of their 
views on the subject. But their resources of evading 
a clear and distinct issue on this question are inex- 
haustible. They supported the second reading of the 
bill, but with this reservation — not mentioned at the 
time — that half the bill was so objectionable that they 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. I. 187 

would not seek to amend it ; that they would not 
seek to introduce new clauses ; but that if it was 
pressed they would treat it as a vote of want of con- 
fidence. Where is there a parallel to such a proceed- 
ing ? If it is to be drawn into a precedent, the re- 
sult would be that the second reading would cease 
to be regarded as the most important vote in favour 
of a bill, but would be looked upon as a hollow pre- 
text and an unmeaning sham. I am fully aware that 
the Government, in supporting the second reading of 
the bill, said that they objected to certain clauses. 
That is no uncommon thing, but I believe that 
never before did any Government or any party in this 
House support the second reading of a bill, and then 
turn round and say : — "If you won't take half of it 
away we regard it as so objectionable that we shall 
treat it as a vote of want of confidence." And now 
the Prime Minister, and every member of the Govern- 
ment and every man of fairness in this House, must 
be aware that it is impossible for us to accept the 
alternative offered to us by the Government. The 
Government proposes that we should split the bill into 
two. I stated distinctly before — 

The Speaker. — I am unwilling to interrupt any 
honourable member of this House, but it is my 
duty to advise the honourable member for Brighton 
that he is now travelling beyond the point allowed 
by the rules of the House, inasmuch as he is now 
discussing the merits of a bill which stands as one 
of the Orders of the Day in the Order Book of the 
House. 

Mr Fawcett. — I shall endeavour, Sir, to obey 



188 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. I. 

your ruling. I do not in the least degree wish to 
discuss the principles of the bill, but simply to refer 
to the course of procedure suggested by the Govern- 
ment. I think that in a few sentences you will see 
that I am not out of order. What did the Govern- 
ment ask us to do ? They said : — " Cut your bill in 
two, and drop one portion." My simple answer is 
that it is absolutely impossible for us to do so. Sup- 
pose I had cut it in two, I should have exposed 
myself to the reproaches of honourable members who 
might have come forward and complained that I had 
broken faith with them, because I only proposed to 
press forward a part of what I had obtained their 
assent to on the second reading. It was absolutely 
imperative, therefore, before doing so that we should 
receive a release from the House. I went to the 
honourable gentleman (Mr Glyn), to whom communi- 
cations affecting the Government are usually made, 
and said, " I do not wish to do anything in the least 
degree to obstruct the Government ; I shall simply 
treat the instruction to be moved by Lord Harting- 
ton as a question of procedure, and shall speak for 
only two or three minutes upon it. If the House 
wishes the bill to be divided let it be divided ; the 
House then releases us from any obligation to pro- 
ceed with the whole bill ; if, however, the House wishes 
the bill to be proceeded with as a whole, I shall deem 
myself bound in honour to persevere with it in that 
form." No one can say this was other than behav- 
ing in a conciliatory manner towards the Government. 
But the strongest point of my case is this. It seems 
to me that the course of proceeding taken by the Go- 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. I. 189 

vernment is absolutely fatal to the privileges of pri- 
vate members, for if it is to be used as a precedent 
it destroys for once and for ever all chance of private 
members legislating upon any subject. In what posi- 
tion are we placed by the conduct of the Government ? 
If they had not treated this measure as a vote of 
want of confidence we should have had a fair chance 
of bringing on the bill. Having carried the second 
reading by an overwhelming majority, we should very 
probably have been able to get the bill into Com- 
mittee even as late as half-past eleven or twelve. We 
should, therefore, have had some chance of getting the 
bill through. But the Government have now effec- 
tually destroyed every vestige of a chance we had of 
passing the bill. This assertion can be supported by 
three reasons. In the first place, it would have been 
perfectly legitimate, and in accordance with the usages 
of this House, to bring the bill on as late as twelve at 
night if it did not involve the existence of a Govern- 
ment : but would it not be preposterous to commence a 
debate involving a ministerial crisis at half-past eleven 
or twelve, with the knowledge that the debate would be 
inevitably adjourned, and that the Government would 
refuse to give a night for resuming it ? The second 
point is equally strong. Before this measure was 
treated as one affecting the fate of the administra- 
tion the great bulk of honourable members on each 
side were anxious to press it on. This was shewn 
on the division for the second reading ; and honour- 
able members having motions would have assisted us 
by postponing them. But now every honourable 
member who does not wish to see a ministerial crisis, 



190 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. I. 

instead of being anxious to press the bill forward, is 
anxious to do all in his power to prevent it coming 
on. We have, therefore, not one chance out of ten 
which we had before of getting the bill forward. The 
third point is that, before the Government treated 
proceeding with this bill as a question involving con- 
fidence, they knew perfectly well that three-fourths 
of the honourable members who sit on this side of 
the House were strongly in favour of the bill. There 
w T as only one English Liberal member, and not a single 
Scotch member, who voted against it on the second 
reading ; but on Monday night, after the Govern- 
ment issued their threat, honourable member after 
honourable member came to importune me to give 
way. I am divulging no private confidence ; what has 
occurred is notorious. That was the intention of the 
move. Honourable member after honourable member 
came to me and said, " We concur entirely in your 
Dublin University Bill ; we agree with every clause 
of it. There are few measures we would rather see 
passed, but when it comes to a question of turning 
out a Government can you expect us to prefer Dublin 
University to a Liberal Government ? Dublin Univer- 
sity may go to " — I won't describe where. We are not 
going to be unreasonable. We don't think we have 
been. We fully recognize the right of the Government 
to treat whatever question they please as one involv- 
ing a vote of confidence in their administration. It 
is for them to decide what implies confidence and 
what does not ; but what we maintain is this, and 
Ave believe the sympathy of the country will be with 
us, that if the Government raise an issue of confidence 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. I. 191 

upon a particular measure, they are pursuing a line 
of policy which, to say the least, is not characterized 
by courage or by fairness, if they refuse to give those 
against whom this issue of confidence is raised, an 
opportunity of trying it. The Government virtually 
prevent us coming on with our bill, they interpose in 
our way what amounts to a ministerial crisis, and 
then having entirely altered the character of our 
position, they absolutely refuse to give us an oppor- 
tunity of discussing the measure. If there is one thing 
the English people appreciate more than another, it 
is fighting in a fair and open way. If the Government 
persist in refusing to accept our challenge, the verdict 
of the common sense English people will be that 
they are dismayed and abashed. Why do they shrink 
from this contest ? They have enormous odds on their 
side. We cannot bring to bear a threat of resignation; 
we cannot bring to bear a threat of dissolution. But 
this is only the coping stone of what has been going 
on for many years, What has been done upon this 
question ? For Hve years we have been trying to 
obtain a decision upon it. Twice our proposals have 
been talked out. Twice they have been counted out. 
Twice they have been got rid of by threats of minis- 
terial resignation. ("No, no.") It is perfectly true. 
And numberless as have been the speeches from the 
Treasury bench, it is absolutely impossible to extract 
from them anything like a clear declaration as to the 
meaning of Ministers upon this subject. What, then, 
will the nation conclude from all this ? That the 
Government in using these tactics to prevent discus- 
sion — for that is what it amounts to — do so either 



192 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. I 

because they have no policy to avow, or because they 
are afraid to let the bulk of the nation know what 
that policy is. We are asked, "Why don't you post- 
pone the measure until next year ? You are im- 
patient ; let the Government legislate upon the ques- 
tion." What security have we for that ? Are not 
the Government already pledged sufficiently ? Have 
they not undertaken to legislate upon five times more 
subjects than they can possibly settle. How many 
questions has the Home Secretary (Mr Bruce) under 
his serious consideration ? No one is more fully pre- 
pared than I am to acknowledge the marvellous in- 
dustry of the Prime Minister, but he must admit that 
after the division taken last week upon the motion 
of the honourable baronet (Sir M. Lopes), the whole 
question of local taxation and local government must 
be taken up next session by the Government. And 
when we are asked to postpone our bill, cannot we 
get instructive warning from the past ? What hap- 
pened three years since ? I hope the House will allow 
me to give this instance, which is an exactly parallel 
case. When the honourable member for East Surrey 
(Mr Locke King) was nearly on the point of carrying 
his Intestacy Bill, he, in a fatal moment, gave it up 
to the Government. Where is that bill ? Echo an- 
swers, "Where'?" Do you expect to find it? You 
might as well look for grapes on thorns or figs on 
thistles. Suppose we, in the same confiding spirit, 
give up this question to the Government. What 
security shall we have that it will be dealt with ? 

Now, apologising for having detained the House 
so long, I shall, in conclusion, endeavour to clear myself 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. I 193 

from one charge almost of a personal character. It 
has been said that I am guilty of presumption in at- 
tempting to legislate upon the great and difficult 
subject of Irish University education. Happily I can 
clear myself effectually from that charge without the 
slightest egotism. If honourable members opposite 
were asked who are the two honourable members 
among them most capable of dealing with the subject 
of Irish education, in whose favour would their verdict 
be given ? There can be no doubt that their verdict 
would be given in favour of the two members repre- 
senting the University of Dublin (Dr Ball and Mr 
Plunket). If, turning to this side of the House, the 
Liberal members were appealed to and asked to name 
the man who from his University experience, from his 
great ability, from his position in this House, from 
his representing a University constituency, is best 
qualified to deal with the subject of University educa- 
tion, should we not all say it was my honourable friend 
the member for the University of Edinburgh (Dr 
Playfair) ? Therefore, I leave myself out of the ques- 
tion, and I say, "Don't look on it as my bill; look 
on it as the bill of those two honourable members 
on the Conservative side of the House and of that 
honourable member on the Liberal benches, who are 
best fitted to deal with the subject. " And if we have 
introduced a bill which, before that threat of resigna- 
tion, obtained an almost unanimous support in this 
House, why are we to be deprived of all chance of 
legislating ? Why are we not to have the same chance 
as other members— and we ask no more — in passing 
this bill ? I am anxious to state that I wish to adopt 
F. s. 13 



194 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. I 

the course which will be the most convenient to the 
House. We are ready to go on with the bill to-morrow 
or the next day ; but if the Government object we 
don't want unduly to press them. If they will promise 
to give us a day, so that if we get into Committee we 
may have a reasonable chance of passing the bill, the 
promoters of the measure will be perfectly satisfied ; 
and we shall be quite content if the Government gives 
us a day before the middle of June. That does not 
seem a very unreasonable proposal. But what we do 
object to is this, that the Prime Minister yesterday — 
I have no doubt unintentionally — gave us an answer 
which leaves us in a worse dilemma than ever. We 
do not know whether the Government are going to 
give us a day or not. We do not know, therefore, 
whether to try to bring the bill on upon a private 
member's night, or to rely on the promise of the 
Government. I am mclined to think that the promise 
of the Prime Minister is worse than useless. I would 
be the last man in the House to think of saying that 
the Prime Minister would not fulfil any promise which 
he made ; but he candidly and particularly warned me 
against taking his promise to imply the possibility of 
the Government giving an early day. What conclusion 
am I to draw from that ? If there be little or no 
probability of our getting an early day, what shall 
we find if we rely on this promise of the Government ? 
We may find that we have for the consideration of 
this measure the fag-end of a morning sitting in the 
dog-days, and that we are placed in the same position 
as we were last year, the Government again using 
against us the argument that it is absurd to go on 
with the bill so late in the session. 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. I 195 

In conclusion, I will say that for five years we have 
persevered with this question. We have fought it 
through many vicissitudes ; it has suffered many re- 
verses ; it has seen many misfortunes. We have at 
last advanced it to a position which we will not will- 
ingly surrender. What we have done in the past we 
shall do in the future. We feel that the object we 
have in view in proposing this measure is to promote 
the great cause of intellectual freedom, of liberal learn- 
ing, and of high culture. Whatever may be the result, 
whether it involve a ministerial resignation or not, 
the issues we are striving for are of infinitely greater 
moment than any mere temporary party triumph; 
and we who have charge of the bill give this pledge 
to the House, that we will continue to do all in our 
power to press this question on for solution, and, if 
possible, to extract from the Government a definite, 
distinct, and intelligible enunciation of their views. 



13—2 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II. 



THE SECOND READING OF THE GOVERNMENT BILL. 

March, 1873. 



If the bill we are now asked to read a second time 
should be rejected, its defeat will constitute perhaps 
the most striking homage ever offered to the eloquence 
of a statesman. If we had been asked to express an 
opinion upon the measure at the conclusion of the 
speech which introduced it, we should undoubtedly 
have given an almost unanimous opinion in favour of 
the second reading. We were so charmed and dazzled 
by the eloquence of the Prime Minister that no one 
thought of criticising the details of his scheme. But 
experience has taught us, and never more forcibly 
than on the present occasion, that it is impossible 
to judge of a measure simply by the speech of the 
minister who introduces it. Hearing from the Prime 
Minister that the great object he had in view in 
bringing forward the bill was to promote the ad- 
vancement of learning in Ireland, I endeavoured to 
study the measure from this point of view, and in 
doing so I had the advantage of being assisted by 
many men of distinguished academic position, who are 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II. 197 

most competent to form an opinion upon its probable in- 
fluence on the advancement of learning and on Univer- 
sity teaching. I was anxious not to be betrayed either 
into premature approval or premature condemnation. 
It was evident that the Prime Minister had bestowed 
so much labour and so much thought on the measure, 
that it was only due to him that his proposals should 
receive a corresponding amount of careful attention. 
I have therefore, with the assistance of the friends to 
whom I have alluded, endeavoured to study the bill 
as closely as I could, and with the permission of the 
House I will as briefly and candidly as possible lay 
the result before them. It will be in the recollection 
of honourable members that a great portion of the 
speech of the Prime Minister was devoted to proving 
that University education in Ireland is not in a satis- 
factory condition, and that a certain class in that coun- 
try are suffering under a grievance. Both of these 
propositions are cordially endorsed, at least on this 
side of the House. It would be strange indeed, if they 
were not accepted by myself and those about me who 
have striven for six years, against every obstacle that 
can be placed in the path of independent members, 
to force this question upon the attention of Parliament 
and the consideration of the Government. We admit 
that University education in Ireland is not in a satis- 
factory condition, and that a class in that country are 
suffering under a grievance. But, admitting the ex- 
istence of the grievance — although we give to it a very 
different interpretation from that given to it by the 
Prime Minister — the question we have to consider is : — 
Will the present measure remove that grievance ? 



198 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II 

Without doubting the good intentions or the perfect 
sincerity of the Prime Minister, I think I can prove 
that the present measure will make the condition of 
University education in Ireland not more satisfactory, 
but more unsatisfactory; that it will introduce worse 
evils than it will cure ; and that it will utterly fail to 
touch the grievance as stated and understood by the 
Prime Minister himself. Never has a measure been 
rejected with so much unanimity. The very class for 
whose benefit it is devised are the first to repudiate 
it. I may be told that the merits of the measure are 
shewn by the fact that it satisfies the extremes of 
neither party. But can it be proved that even moderate 
men in Ireland are satisfied with it ? The reason of 
this general dissatisfaction can be easily understood. 
No principle is consistently carried out in the bill. It 
is just one of those compromises on the give-and-take 
principle, which are intended to please everybody and 
end by pleasing nobody. The Catholic prelates who 
have condemned it in such uncompromising terms have 
been accused of being illogical, inconsistent, and un- 
grateful. Without, however, in the least agreeing in 
their views, I am bound to say that these prelates have 
always told us what they want with perfect straight- 
forwardness. It is not they, but the Government, who 
have been illogical and inconsistent ; for, according to 
the speech of the Prime Minister, and, what is more 
important, according to the provisions of his bill, the 
Government virtually acknowledge the justice of the 
demand of the Catholic prelates for an adequate 
and separate endowment of their educational institu- 
tions. Before dealing with this subject I will ask 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II 199 

the House to consider those portions of the bill which 
may be regarded as its accessories. First of all, it is 
proposed to abolish the Queen's University and the 
Queen's College at Galway. As to the abolition of 
the Queen's University, no one has asked for it ; no 
academic reformer approves it ; on the contrary, every 
one's opinion is against it, and the whole experience 
of every other country is antagonistic to such a pro- 
posal. In countries where University education is most 
prosperous, where it does the most to form national 
character and develop the best national qualities, there 
are to be found not one but several Universities. On 
the other hand, in countries where education has most 
declined, this unfortunate plan of centralization has 
been adopted. If we wish to point to countries where 
University education is most thriving we should select 
Germany with its 20 Universities, and Scotland, a small 
country, with its four Universities. Now Scotch mem- 
bers are generally shrewd enough to take care of their 
own interests ; but if they are induced to vote for this 
centralizing policy in University education, where will 
their four Universities be, in ten years' time ? They 
will be amalgamated into a Central Board, the creature 
of political nomination, with a political officer presiding 
over it — possibly the Lord Advocate. France has only 
one University, and every writer on the subject regrets 
that it has not more. Belgium is in much the same 
position, and a high authority (M. Emile de Lavaleye) 
has said this system of centralization " causes the 
professors to conform to an uniform standard, and 
by degrees it stifles initiative and the genuine spirit 
of research." The proposal to abolish the Queen's 



200 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION, II. 

University is indefensible from every point of view. 
It would destroy wholesome competition. Cambridge 
would not be in so satisfactory a position were it not 
for Oxford and London ; and the converse holds 
true with regard to Oxford and London. But inde- 
fensible as would be the abolition of the Queens Uni- 
versity, the proposal to abolish Queen's College, Galway, 
is more indefensible still. I cannot help repeating the 
complaint of Lord E. Fitzmaurice that the Prime 
Minister, in describing Galway College, did not quote 
the figures of the last year, which happens to be one 
of the most prosperous years in its existence. No one 
can doubt that at the present moment Galway is doing 
excellent work, considering the unfavourable circum- 
stances in which it is placed. It is not resorted to 
by the sons of the wealthy ; those who frequent it 
are chiefly the sons of small farmers and poor trades- 
men. But considering the number of students turned 
out by this college in the remote west of Ireland; 
considering their position at the present moment — 
high up in the English and the Indian Civil Services, 
pursuing honourable professional careers, or even sit- 
ting on the judicial bench — what would their position 
have been had not this college existed? Can the 
House for one moment think of sanctioning this ob- 
jectionable proposal ? Nothing in the Prime Minis- 
ter's speech do I regret so much as the manner in 
which he estimated the cost of the students at Galway. 
In the first place there is a fallacy in his argument. 
He estimates the cost of each student in arts at 
£230; of each medical student at £180; and of each 
law student at over £300 per annum. But he arrives 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II. 201 

at these results by considering that each professor's 
work is solely to be estimated by the number of 
students who proceed to degrees, and not by the 
number he teaches. (Mr Gladstone — " No, no.") I 
protest against the whole system of estimating the 
utility of a collegiate institution as an auctioneer, a 
salesman, or an appraiser would estimate the value 
of a parcel of goods or a bale of merchandise. We 
could have little expected such a mode of appraising 
educational results from a Prime Minister who, above 
all things, is distinguished for his high culture and 
his great scholarship. If the Prime Minister proceeds 
on this plan, where is he going to stop ? If Galway 
College is to be abolished, why did the right honour- 
able gentleman a few hours after he introduced his 
bill recommend her Majesty to fill up the chair of 
Pastoral Theology in his own University ? The stipend 
of this professor bears at least a ten times larger pro- 
portion to the number of students he instructs, than 
does that of any of the professors of the Galway Col- 
lege. In the last academical year seventy-five students 
entered at Galway College, which has an income of 
£10,000 a year. At Magdalen College, Oxford, only 
twenty-five students matriculated, and its revenues are 
said to be £40,000 a year. The arithmetical argument 
therefore in favour of abolishing Magdalen College 
is twelve times as strong as it is in favour of abo- 
lishing Galway College. But take the very college of 
which the right honourable gentleman himself is so 
distinguished a member. The average matriculations 
at Christ-Church are seventy a year. This is about 
the number matriculating at Galway. But when we 



202 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II. 

compare the revenues of the two colleges, we find that 
Christ-Church is three times as wealthy as Galway. 
If, then, the arithmetical argument is pressed to a 
logical conclusion, the right honourable gentleman will 
arrive at some very awkward results. To prove the 
necessity of destroying Queen's College, Galway, the 
Prime Minister laid down the extraordinary doctrine 
that no one is to be considered an University student 
unless he is a student in arts ; and he adds that every 
one would endorse this opinion. Now I emphatically 
deny the assertion, and most University authorities 
will confirm my statement. If the Premier's opinion 
is well founded, what becomes of the 4,000 Scotch 
students on whom he dwells with so much force? 
They are not all students in arts. As I am informed, 
at least one-half of them are professional students. 
University reformers at Oxford and Cambridge have 
been trying to establish other schools besides the 
schools of arts, yet Queen's College, Galway, is to be 
sacrificed, forsooth, because she has only so many stu- 
dents in arts ! Accept this proposal of the Govern- 
ment, and Queen's College, Cork, is not worth a year's 
purchase. The arguments for its abolition are much 
stronger than those for the abolition of Queen's College, 
Galway. Taking as a test the number of students 
in arts, the number of those in Cork exceeds the 
number at Galway by 40 per cent., while the popu- 
lation of Cork exceeds that of Galway by 600 per 
cent. So that a stronger argument can be made out 
for the abolition of Queen's College, Cork, than for 
that of the college at Galway. The truth is that this 
proposal to abolish Queen's College, Galway, indicates 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II 203 

a settled determination on the part of the Govern- 
ment to disparage united education in Ireland, and 
ultimately to root it out of the land. The Prime 
Minister's argument was ingenious and elaborate, but 
when the House considers the circumstances of the 
country, the poverty of the people, the anathemas 
of the Church, and the threat of constant Parlia- 
mentary interference — instead of these colleges being 
a failure, their present position proves that a strong 
desire is really felt by the Irish people to participate 
in the advantages of united education. The figures 
quoted by the right honourable gentleman prove that 
up to 1865 these colleges were in a state of progress 
and that this progress was then suddenly arrested. 
Is this an accidental circumstance? In 1865 began 
the policy of denouncing these colleges. In 1865 
Cardinal Cullen said that those parents and guard- 
ians who permitted their children to attend these 
colleges were unworthy of the sacraments of the Church, 
and should be excluded from them. Dr Derry, the 
Bishop of Clonfert, declared that those fathers and 
mothers who persisted in sending their children to 
receive this kind of education disregarded the warn- 
ings, entreaties, and decisions of the head of the 
Church, and that those who were guilty of such con- 
duct should be deprived of the Eucharist and of the 
holy sacraments. Was a more cruel, cowardly, and 
inhuman denunciation ever uttered % Why, this bishop 
could not have used stronger language if these pa- 
rents had been sending a daughter to prostitution, or 
a son to some sink of vice. These denunciations 
shew that Parliament can not completely carry out 



204 IRISH UNIVERSITY ED UCA TION. II. 

the work of emancipation when it strikes off the 
fetters which prevent men from enjoying bodily free- 
dom. This cruel and cowardly policy, I regret to say, 
has been aided and abetted by a Liberal Govern- 
ment. The period in question was that of threat- 
ened Parliamentary interference — the period of the 
Supplemental Charter to the Queen's University ; when 
the Government only failed in their undertaking 
to destroy united education in Ireland, in conse- 
quence of the opposition of the House of Commons. 
This is strong language, and I should not use it my- 
self. It is the language of that master of artistic de- 
scription, the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr Lowe). 
When these denunciations are hurled by the superior 
clergy, and the threat of Governmental interference 
is constantly repeated, is it surprising that these 
colleges should somewhat decline ? It would have 
been a matter for no surprise if they had ceased to 
exist altogether. But the tide has turned, and the 
struggle that they have carried on with so much 
success against such unparalleled obstacles shews that 
the people of Ireland appreciate united education, and 
they will be slow to believe that the British Parliament 
will deprive them of this blessing and advantage. I 
now come to the main provisions of the bill. First, 
there is the Constitution of the Governing Council. 
The Prime Minister has quoted various precedents to 
shew that the House ought not to ask for the names 
of this Council. His precedents, however, have been 
satisfactorily disposed of. What is there in common 
between the appointment of four or five Boundary 
Commissioners and a governing body which is to 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II 205 

control the fortunes of a National University, and to 
which it is proposed to entrust powers never before 
given to any University or college that ever existed ? 
The Prime Minister moreover is absolutely silent as 
to the principle on which the Council is to be con- 
stituted. Is he going to select men of the greatest 
academic experience, or is he about to adopt a principle 
fraught with especial mischief in Ireland, that this 
Council must necessarily represent, not academic learn- 
ing, but religious opinion ? Is it to contain a certain 
number of Protestants and a certain number of Roman 
Catholics ? But there is a wider and more potent 
argument against this Council, and that is that it 
would be the creature of political nomination. The 
Prime Minister drew a parallel between this Council 
and the governing bodies at Oxford and Cambridge. 
But the difference between them is wide and marked. 
This Council, which is to be the creature of political 
nomination, will have to appoint professors, to pre- 
scribe the subjects of examination, to subject the pro- 
fessors to a sort of censorship, to frame a curriculum, 
to dispose of vast endowments, and to manage every- 
thing connected with the University. At Cambridge, 
and it is the same at Oxford, the Council, which is not 
politically nominated, but elected by resident mem- 
bers of the University, is not entrusted with a tithe 
of these powers. It is simply a Council of initiation. 
It does not appoint the professors, or increase their 
salaries, or change the curriculum, without obtaining 
the consent and sanction of the Senate of the Uni- 
versity. The most extraordinary provision of the bill 
is that the Chancellor of the new University is to be 



206 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II. 

the Lord-Lieutenant. I wish for one moment to ask 
honourable members what they would think if it were 
proposed that the English Universities should be pre- 
sided over by some one who, by the exigencies of party 
or by faithful voting, had been made Home Secretary or 
First Commissioner of Works. But then it may be 
said that the Lord-Lieutenant is not simply a political 
officer ; he is also a Court official. Well, I wonder 
what would be thought at Oxford and Cambridge if 
it were proposed that they should have as their Chan- 
cellor the Lord-Chamberlain, the Controller of the 
Household, or a Goldstick in Waiting. The proposal 
is so preposterous that it would scarcely be necessary 
to refer to it, if it, did not shew a settled determination 
running through the whole of the bill to fetter this 
new University, which the Government wishes to call 
into existence, in the degrading bonds of political 
subserviency. And this policy, forsooth, is to be tried 
in Ireland, as if every Minister responsible for this bill 
does not know that of all the things that have caused 
the misfortunes of Ireland, nothing has done so much 
to bring her unhappiness as the curse of political sub- 
serviency. Trinity College, Dublin, has been a place 
where honours and emoluments could be won without 
subservience to any political party, but henceforward 
it is to be subordinated to a political corporation. It 
is the more necessary to scrutinize the composition 
of the Council, and to force from the Government a 
-declaration of the principle that is to regulate its Con- 
stitution, when we remember the extraordinary powers 
that are to be entrusted to it. There is to be no check 
on the number of the colleges that may be incorpo- 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II. 207 

rated in the University ; 20 Roman Catholic semi- 
naries may be affiliated. There is no reason, indeed, 
why the Council should not also affiliate every Roman 
Catholic seminary in England and Scotland. But this 
is not all. This facility of affiliation will act as an 
instruction to the authorities of the various educational 
institutions to enter upon a rivalry of denominational 
zeal, in which the interests of higher education will 
be forgotten, in order to obtain the denominational 
majority on the Governing Council. I now come to 
still more extraordinary provisions. The Council will 
have to enforce a degrading censorship on professors ; 
it will have to administer provisions which may be 
made to exclude from the University almost every 
branch of liberal learning ; and it will have to give 
effect to regulations which, as I shall presently shew, 
may be so worked as to reduce every examination 
to a meaningless farce. Never before were such pro- 
posals brought forward by any Government, even 
in the most despotic country, as are contained in these 
clauses which exclude certain subjects from the Univer- 
sity curriculum, and impose the most degrading censor- 
ship ever thought of upon the professors. If modern 
history and mental philosophy are excluded from the 
University, what is the University going to teach ? 
Why even the teaching of the favourite language of 
the Prime Minister would be rendered a farce, as a 
professor would not be able to lecture on the most 
distinguished classical authors whose works refer to 
philosophical subjects. Last week, being at Cam- 
bridge, I gave a copy of the bill to a distinguished 
lecturer on Aristotle, and, without saying a word which 



208 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II 

might bias his opinion, I asked him to read the 
gagging clauses and to state what would be the result 
if similar clauses were extended to his University. 
And here I would, in passing, remark that the rights 
of conscience are as sacred in England as in Ireland, 
and that if the rights of conscience in Ireland require 
this protection, they will soon require the same pro- 
tection in Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Glasgow, 
St Andrew's, and Aberdeen. Well I gave the bill to 
the lecturer, saying, "Consider these clauses with regard 
to your lectures on Aristotle." His reply was, "If these 
clauses were extended to this University I could never 
give a lecture on Aristotle without incurring a risk of 
breaking the law." If the House will excuse me for 
quoting my own experience, I will add that it is ab- 
solutely impossible to lecture on Political Economy with- 
out referring to the events of modern history. Take up 
Adam Smith for example, glance over ten pages of that 
great author, and you will find that to teach Political 
Economy without referring to modern history makes 
the subject unintelligible. Again, the professors are 
to be subjected to the most degrading censorship ever 
dreamt of. By way of illustration I will again, with 
the permission of the House, refer to my own experi- 
ence. Now, much as I value the position of a professor 
in the University of Cambridge, I should feel that I 
could not conscientiously hold my professorship for 
a single hour if the Prime Minister succeeded in in- 
troducing these clauses into the English Universities. 
I would not submit to the degradation of being sub- 
jected to such a censorship as is contained in this 
bill. I will suppose that a professor is lecturing on 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II 209 

pauperism. This lie could not do without referring to 
the history of the Poor Law, and he could not treat 
of that subject without speaking of the indigence 
produced by the breaking up of the monastic insti- 
tutions. If, however, he referred to monastic insti- 
tutions, a student would perhaps write to him and 
say, "If you refer to them again, you will offend my 
religious convictions." Now, would any man submit to 
be called before a University Council — not created by 
the University, but the creature of political nomina- 
tion — and to subject himself, without power of appeal, 
to suspension, or any other punishment the Council 
might devise? But this is not all. Examinations 
will, if this bill passes, be reduced to an absolute farce, 
because it is provided that " no student is to suffer any 
disadvantage for adopting in law, medicine, modern 
history, mental or moral philosophy, or any other 
branch of learning" — I wonder why the previous enu- 
meration was made — "any theory in preference to any 
received theory." Of course, if there were any question 
which a student could not answer, he would say: — 
"I shall not answer that question, because I do not 
adopt that particular theory." For example, if a stu- 
dent were asked to prove the 47th proposition of the 
first book of Euclid, he might say: — "I cannot answer 
the question, because I do not adopt the theory that 
the square of the hypothenuse is equal to the sum 
of the squares described on the other two sides of 
a right-angled triangle." This clause will remain 
a monument of the vagaries of distinguished states- 
men. 

I will now again call attention to the gagging 
F.s. 14 



210 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II 

clauses and I shall present them to the House from 
a very serious point of view. When I said to my 
honourable friends around me: — "Surely you are never 
going to pass a bill by which the teaching of modern 
history, and moral and mental philosophy, is prohibited, 
while a degrading censorship is imposed on teachers 
and examiners?" they all said: — "Oh, of course the 
Government will drop these clauses." Yes, of course 
they will have to drop them. But the Government 
can never repair the mischief which their proposal 
has inflicted on the future of Irish Education. Never, 
indeed, will there be a more striking exemplification of 
the saying, " The evil that men do lives after them." 
The House may reject this bill and may repudiate these 
clauses, but henceforward every priest who desires to 
cramp and fetter the mind will be able to say: — "This 
is not my opinion. I am not acting in obedience to 
orders from the Vatican. In telling you that you 
cannot go to an- institution where modern history and 
philosophy are taught, I am not expressing my own 
opinion, but am simply giving effect to a policy which 
has received the sanction of an English Government 
and a Liberal Administration." Now, bearing this 
consideration in mind, it will not be difficult to shew 
that the bill, if carried, will prove fatal to united edu- 
cation, and can lead to no other conclusion than the 
endowment of denominational institutions in Ireland. 
Every one knows from the denunciations that have 
been uttered by bishops and priests in Ireland, what 
a terrible struggle those Irish parents and guardians 
have had to carry on who wish their sons to enjoy 
united education. The point I wish particularly to 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II 211 

impress on the House is that henceforward that struggle 
will, in consequence of these proposals of the Govern- 
ment, become infinitely more difficult ; for each priest 
will now be able to say : — "You send your sons to 
Cork, to Galway, and to Trinity. In those institutions 
there are professorships of modern history and of moral 
and mental philosophy, but an English Government 
and a Liberal Cabinet have told you that the rights of 
conscience cannot be safe in institutions where those 
subjects are taught, and therefore you are bound to 
remove your sons from them." Thus in a few years 
the enemies of united education, having this weapon 
to work with, would be able to get almost every 
Catholic out of Trinity College and the Queen's Colleges. 
What will be the next inevitable step? It will be 
said, and said with truth, " Trinity College has an 
endowment of £50,000 a year, and the Queen's Colleges 
have an annual endowment of £10,000 each. In these 
institutions those subjects are taught which an English 
Government says cannot be taught if adequate pro- 
tection is to be given to rights of conscience. There- 
fore you cannot safely entrust your children to them. 
You must come into our own institutions, which possess 
no endowments. Under these circumstances we have 
a claim to endowments, and that claim it will be im- 
possible to resist." Let honourable members reflect 
for a moment on the consequences of destroying united 
education in Ireland. Is there any Catholic in this 
House who has been educated at Trinity College, 
Dublin, who will not bear me out when I say that 
he looks back on his college career with the utmost 
satisfaction, and is glad he has been brought into 

14—2 



212 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II. 

contact with his Protestant fellow-countrymen? Are 
there, again, any Protestants in this House who would 
not regret to see Catholics excluded from Trinity Col- 
lege ? Those Catholics and Protestants who are asso- 
ciated together in early life take a kindlier view of each 
other than they otherwise would, and look with a 
j uster toleration on religious differences. Therefore, 
it is impossible to inflict a greater injury upon Ireland 
than to encourage a policy which would place a new 
and powerful weapon in the hands of the opponents 
of united education. The Prime Minister has rested 
his case on the fact that certain sections of the people 
of Ireland, have a grievance in regard to higher educa- 
tion. I admit the existence of the grievance, but I 
think it calls for a remedy entirely different from that 
proposed by the Prime Minister. If, however, the 
right honourable gentleman had satisfied the grievance, I 
am bound to say we ought not to look too scrupulously 
into the provisions of the bill. But he has not satisfied 
the grievance; he has not satisfied a single class in 
Ireland. We have not the consolation that any section 
of opinion in Ireland would be rendered more con- 
tented, while it is certain that the bill contains princi- 
ples which would produce the utmost mischief. Never 
before has a measure been condemned by so great a 
consensus of opinion. The Roman Catholic prelates 
have repudiated it. The Roman Catholic students 
in the Catholic University were the first to reject 
with indignation those safeguards for the protection 
of the conscience which have been introduced into it. 
The Senate of the University of Dublin — that institu- 
tion which the House has been told is under such 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II 213 

galling thraldom to Trinity College — has united with 
the authorities of the College in protesting against 
the bill. The authorities of the Queen's Colleges, too, 
have strenuously objected to many of its provisions; 
while the Nationalists and Home-Rulers have said 
that the measure supplies a conclusive proof that an 
English Parliament is unfit to govern Ireland. I 
should, however, be sorry to overstate the case. The 
bill, after all, has not been unanimously rejected in 
Ireland. Magee College has petitioned in its favour. 
It appears to me that there cannot be a more conclusive 
proof of the unpopularity of the bill in Ireland than 
is afforded by the fact that the Prime Minister, in 
order to shew even the most minute modicum of 
approval of his measure, was reduced to the desperate 
strait of asking that the petition should be read by 
the Speaker. ("No, No.") Then the right honourable 
gentleman read it himself (A laugh and cries of "No," 
and "It was read by the Clerk at the table). Well, 
the clerk at the table was ordered to read a petition 
emanating from an institution in which the average 
entry of students is 1-| a year. 

There are many other objections which I should 
like to urge against the bill, and I shall perhaps have 
an opportunity of doing so on some future occasion. 
But I wish, before I sit down, to guard myself against 
one reproach which, I understand, may be urged 
against me, and which has already been hinted at by 
my honourable friend the member for Tralee (The 
O'Donoghue). He seems to think that those who 
oppose this bill and who hold certain views with 
respect to University education in Ireland are the 



214 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II. 

victims of a "No Popery" mania. Now, that is an 
insinuation which we may with some confidence repu- 
diate ; for have we not always done what we could 
to admit Catholics to all the advantages of the Eng- 
lish Universities, and to place them on an equality 
with every other member of the community ? Roman 
Catholics are at the present moment unhappily ex- 
cluded from many positions of honour and emolument 
in those Universities, but that is not my fault nor the 
fault of those with whom I act. It is not we but 
the present Government, who, by the retention of 
clerical fellowships, prevented the policy of perfect 
religious equality being carried out in the English 
Universities. As to this bill, there are no doubt 
many honourable members who, while they object to 
it, will vote for the second reading, in the hope that 
it may be amended in Committee. I wish, however, 
to point out to the House that there is a fashion 
growing up to treat the second reading of bills as a 
matter of no importance. But high as is the exam- 
ple set me, I am not going to do what was done 
last year on a similar occasion, when the Government 
supported the second reading of the Dublin Univer- 
sity Tests Bill, the principle of which was afterwards 
found to be so objectionable that they checked all 
further progress of the bill by a threat of resignation. 
If the House votes for the second reading, it votes 
for the principle of the bill ; and when what are called 
the gagging clauses come on for discussion in Com- 
mittee, a member on the Treasury Bench may rise in 
his place and say : — " What, you are going to oppose 
these clauses, notwithstanding that you have voted 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II. 215 

for the second reading, and thus endorsed the prin- 
ciple of the bill \ We told you that this measure 
is intended to secure the rights of conscience. " For 
my own part, I think there is in politics nothing like 
a clear and straightforward course. It may be said 
that entertaining the opinions I do, I ought not to be 
content with voting simply in favour of the resolution 
of the honourable member for King's Lynn (Mr Bourke), 
and that I ought to oppose the second reading. 
Well, I wish there had been a direct opposition to 
the second reading, instead of the resolution. But I 
approve of the resolution so far as it goes, and as it 
is the question before the House I shall vote for it. 
When, however, I have an opportunity, I shall act, I 
hope, consistently, and vote against the second read- 
ing. I trust at all events that the measure will be 
either accepted or rejected on its merits, and that the 
decision will not be influenced by collateral consider- 
ations. The House is well aware that the judgment 
of the most sagacious politicians is sometimes warped 
by rumours industriously circulated of a ministerial 
crisis. Well, what does a ministerial crisis mean ? If 
such a crisis should arise, there would either be a 
resignation of the Government or a dissolution of 
Parliament. If there should be a resignation of the 
Government, nearly the same persons will soon return 
to office with principles somewhat reinvigorated and 
restored. If there is a dissolution, some members may 
not return to this House ; but if it is their lot to be 
defeated, they will only be anticipating their fate by 
a few months. And would it not, I ask, be infinitely 
better never to return to this House than to sanction 



216 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. II. 

a measure which would destroy an ancient and illus- 
trious University, and set up in its place a corpora- 
tion created by political nomination, which would 
impose on University teaching a censorship to which 
no man of independence would for one moment submit, 
and which would endorse the principle that the events 
of modern history and the ideas of some of our greatest 
thinkers cannot be expounded without suggesting the 
miserable suspicion that the object the teacher has 
in view is to promote some sectarian squabble, instead 
of developing the minds of his students and extend- 
ing the range of thought % I beg to thank the House 
for the patience with which they have listened to 
me, and I have in conclusion only to express an ear- 
nest hope that a measure will not be allowed to pass 
into law which, so far as University education is con- 
cerned, would, in a country already unhappily dis- 
turbed and distracted, unsettle everything without 
settling anything, annihilate much that is good, and 
call into existence much that is bad, and would, above 
all, in the brief but memorable words of the students in 
the Catholic University " prove fatal to high culture." 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. III. 

SECOND READING OF THE DUBLIN UNIVERSITY 
TESTS RILL, April, 1873. 

It has fallen to my lot to speak so often on the subject 
of this bill that it will not be necessary for me to 
occupy the time of the House more than a few minutes. 
I am anxious as far as possible to avoid all topics 
which could lead to recriminations about the past. I 
wish to secure the passing of the bill as speedily as 
possible ; for there is a practical object to be gained 
by passing it before the end of next month. It is 
due to the House that I should state the exact posi- 
tion of the question at present, and how it has come 
to pass that the bill is different from the one I origi- 
nally introduced, a portion of which has been aban- 
doned. Three or four weeks ago It was intimated to 
those in charge of the bill that if they would abandon 
one portion of it— namely, that which proposed to 
constitute a Council, to which should be entrusted the 
future reorganization and management of Trinity Col- 
lege and the University of Dublin — the Government 
would facilitate the passing of the remainder of the 
measure, which is that relating to the abolition of 



218 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. III. 

all religious tests. In deciding to accept this offer 
of the Government we were influenced by several 
considerations. It is hardly necessary for me to say 
that we abandoned a portion of the bill reluctantly ; 
and we still retain the opinion that it would have 
been better if the whole bill had been passed. We 
were, however, met bv these considerations : — In the 
first place, we knew perfectly well from the experience 
of last session that, if the Government did not assist 
us by giving us Government nights, it was absolutely 
impossible that there could be the smallest chance 
of the bill becoming law this session. For what hap- 
pened last year ? The second reading of a bill, more 
complete than the one now before the House, was 
carried by an overwhelming majority — a majority of 
four to one — before Easter. The promoters of the 
bill did everything that independent members could 
do to get it into Committee ; but the Government 
objected to pass the bill as a whole ; they therefore 
rendered us no assistance, and the result was that, 
although we availed ourselves of every opportunity, 
we were unable to get the bill forward. This being 
the case, we felt that if, on the present occasion, we 
preserved the bill intact, it would be almost certain 
not to pass this session, even although the second 
reading were carried by an overwhelming majority. 
On the other hand, we thought that if we accepted 
the offer of the Government, and confined the bill 
simply to an abolition of tests, it was almost certain 
that the measure would pass. We were also influenced 
by the consideration that we have always regarded 
the abolition of tests as the most important part of 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. III. 219 

the measure ; and that the reorganization of Trinity 
College and the University of Dublin, the part of 
the question now left untouched, may possibly, as I 
shall presently shew, be settled at some future time 
without the direct intervention of Parliament. There 
is also another consideration by which we have been 
influenced. The abolition of tests is not simply de- 
sirable as a theoretical reform; but it is a reform of 
pressing and practical importance. Last year one of 
the most eminent students in Trinity College, Dublin, 
gained a fellowship which he was prevented from en- 
joying in consequence of the existence of those religious 
tests which this bill will abolish. Another fellowship 
examination is to be held at the beginning of next 
month ; we therefore felt that if we did not accept 
the offer of the Government, it was quite possible 
that we might, by delaying the passing of this measure, 
be inflicting a great injury on a distinguished and 
deserving student. The second reading is to be met 
by two resolutions, brought forward by my honourable 
friends the members for County Galway and Tralee 
(Mr Mitchell Henry, and The O'Donoghue). Although 
I may not agree with the spirit or intention of either 
of these resolutions, they seem to me so entirely irrele- 
vant to the bill that it is scarcely necessary to enter 
into any controversy with my honourable friends. The 
resolution of Mr Mitchell Henry affirms that, in order 
to settle the question of Irish University Education, 
it is necessary that a Royal Commission should be 
appointed to take evidence from academic bodies, and 
from those persons in Ireland who are most interested 
in the subject. Now, even if the necessity of such a 



220 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. III. 

commission were admitted, there is not trie slightest 
reason why Mr Mitchell Henry should withhold his 
support from the present bill ; for surely he will agree 
with me that it does not require a Royal Commission 
to decide whether we shall apply to Ireland the same 
legislation that has been applied to the Universities 
of Oxford and Cambridge and abolish all religious 
tests in the University of Dublin. As to the re- 
solution of The O'Donoghue, it is equally irrelevant 
to the present measure. Honourable members who 
cordially endorse every syllable of that resolution 
may, nevertheless, give an emphatic vote in favour 
of the bill. The O'Donoghue asks the House to 
declare that the abolition of religious tests will not 
settle the question of Irish University Education. But 
who thinks it would settle the question? The honour- 
able gentleman cannot suppose Her Majesty's Govern- 
ment are of opinion that the passing of this bill will 
settle it. We have entered into no engagement and 
given no undertaking that the question shall not be 
re- opened. If the Government should desire again to 
enter upon the subject of Irish University Education 
they will be able to do so next session with as much 
readiness as if this bill had never been passed. As 
far as my own opinion and the opinions of my honour- 
able friends who promote this bill are concerned, the 
best pledge we can give to The O'Donoghue that we 
do not consider the abolition of religious tests to be 
a settlement of the question of Irish University Edu- 
cation, is that we should not have abandoned a portion 
of our bill, if we had not been compelled to do so by 
the circumstances and necessities of the case. The 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. Ill 221 

honourable member cannot hope to have a more satis- 
factory assurance that we do not regard the simple 
abolition of tests as a settlement of the question. With 
regard to what is likely to be the future of Irish 
University Education, it may possibly happen that the 
subject will not have to be dealt with in this Parlia- 
ment, and who can venture to predict what the opinions 
of a new Parliament will be in reference to this ques- 
tion ? - Again, it may not improbably happen that, if 
the authorities of Trinity College and the University 
of Dublin act during next year with the same sagacity 
and liberality that have characterized their conduct 
since the disestablishment of the Irish Church, they 
may take the subject, to a great extent, out of the 
hands of this House. This they may do by preparing 
a set of statutes of their own, so liberal that the House 
of Commons may consider that the best thing to be 
done for the promotion of University education in 
Ireland would be to leave the question in the hands 
of a distinguished academic body, and simply to 
move a humble address to the Queen, praying Her 
Majesty to accept the statutes drawn up by the 
authorities of the College and University. I hope my 
Catholic friends in this House will believe me when 
I say, I am perfectly ready to admit that the Catholics 
in Ireland, and the residents in that country who are 
not members of the Protestant Episcopal Church, have 
suffered, and are suffering at the present time, a most 
serious grievance with regard to University education. 
If I had not felt this, why should I have striven during 
almost every year that I have been in Parliament to 
force this subject on the attention of the House? The 



222 IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. Ill 

difference between my Catholic friends and myself is, 
not as to the existence of the grievance, but as to 
the remedy for it. I think that if we abolish all 
religious disabilities — if we do everything we can to 
efface the traces of past inequality, without infringing 
the principle of academic freedom and without intro- 
ducing the principle of political nomination; if we lay 
a foundation which in future will give every Catholic 
and every Non-conformist in Ireland the same oppor- 
tunity of obtaining honours and emoluments in regard 
to University education as is possessed by members 
of the Anglican Church; then we shall do all that 
can be done to secure educational equality. But my 
honourable friends the Catholic members in the House 
put a different interpretation on the grievance under 
which they say they are suffering, and they also sug- 
gest a different remedy. They say they will never 
enjoy justice as long as encouragement is given by 
means of endowments to the mixing together in edu- 
cational institutions of Catholics, Protestants, and 
people of different religions. If this is their grievance, 
all I can say is that it probably admits of but one 
remedy — namely, the application to University educa- 
tion of the principle of concurrent endowment. Now 
in striving after concurrent endowment, the Catholic 
members of this House know far better than I can 
tell them that they are striving after what there is not 
the least chance of their obtaining. Considering what 
has recently occurred, can any reasonable man suppose 
that there is the slightest chance of concurrent endow- 
ment with regard to University education being con- 
ceded ? Nothing could be more positive and emphatic 



IRISH UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. III. 223 

than the assurance of the Prime Minister in his 
memorable speech at the close of the debate on his 
Irish University bill. Much as that speech was admired, 
no portion of it gave such entire satisfaction to the 
whole body of the right honourable gentleman's English 
and Scotch supporters, as did the sentences in which 
he declared in language that could not be mistaken, 
that the day for concurrent endowment was gone 
for ever. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Disraeli), 
in the speech he delivered the same evening, was not 
so emphatic and precise, but he let fall some doubtful 
phrases on the subject of concurrent endowment. 
What was the result ? It is perfectly well known 
that alarm and dismay spread throughout the right 
honourable gentleman's ranks, and, in order not to 
be misunderstood, he took care, in a speech he made a 
few days afterwards, to prove to his party and to the 
country, that between himself and the Prime Minister 
there was not the slightest difference of opinion on the 
question of concurrent endowment. It is scarcely 
necessary for me to say more, except to express my 
thanks to the Government for having fulfilled their 
engagement to facilitate the passing of this bill, by 
affording us a convenient time for its discussion. I 
will now with confidence commend the measure to the 
favourable consideration of the House. If it becomes 
law, it will, I believe, introduce a great reform ; it will 
remove a crying injustice; it will place Irish University 
Education in a more satisfactory position than it oc- 
cupies at present ; and it will clear the way for its 
future reform and development. 



THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 

SECOND BEADING OF THE ENCLOSURE LAW 
AMENDMENT BILL, April, 1871. 



Probably no more serious accusation can be brought 
against Parliament than that it has habitually per- 
mitted the interests of the public and the poor to 
be ignored, whenever proposals have been brought 
forward for the enclosure of commons. Up to 1845 
commons were enclosed by private bills. In this way 
during a century and a half 5,000,000 acres of land 
were enclosed ; and, after a careful enquiry, a high 
authority, the late duke of Newcastle, declared that, 
in the case of these enclosures, the interests of the 
public and the poor had been in almost every instance 
most shamefully neglected. In 1845 the course of 
procedure was changed, for this House then assumed 
the responsibility of taking the enclosure of commons 
under its immediate control. But although the pro- 
cedure was changed, there was no change in anything 
else ; the same abuses continued to flourish as vigor- 
ously under the new as under the old system. I 
believe any impartial person must arrive at the con- 
clusion that, in this matter, there is not a pin to choose 
between Liberal and Conservative Governments. Each 



THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 225 

alike has apparently attempted to do everything in its 
power to facilitate the enclosure of commons, utterly 
disregarding the injury which such inclosures may 
inflict upon the people. There never was a worse 
Enclosure Bill brought forward than the one which 
was introduced two years since into the present Parlia- 
ment. It would have enclosed 6,900 acres of land, 
and out of this large area there was only to be a 
beggarly reservation of 3 acres as recreation grounds 
for the public, and 6 acres as allotment gardens for 
the poor. When it is remembered that the present 
Liberal Government was placed in power by the en- 
thusiasm of the newly enfranchised householders — ■ 
when it is remembered that there are now sitting on 
the Treasury Bench advanced politicians who, when 
they were out of office, have on a hundred different 
platforms eloquently denounced the policy of divorcing 
the people from the soil, — when these things are re- 
membered, it will be scarcely believed that this very 
Government and these enthusiastic asserters of popular 
rights strained every effort to force through Parliament 
that monstrous bill. When the bill had reached its 
third reading, I happened, almost accidentally, to dis- 
cover what its contents really were. I may of course 
be fairly charged with negligence for not having made 
the discovery sooner. This I readily admit ; in fact, 
there is nothing for which I more reproach myself than 
that I omitted, during the first few years I had a seat 
in this House, to scrutinize the Enclosure Bills which 
were annually introduced. I can now only say that 
I will endeavour by watchfulness in the future to make 
some amends for this negligence in the past. When 
F. s. 15 



226 THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 

however, as I have previously said, I almost accidentally 
discovered, just as the bill was passing its third read- 
ing, that it proposed, out of 6,900 acres, to reserve 
only 9 acres for the use of the public and the poor, 
I thought it was only necessary to bring this fact 
under the notice of the Government, for some member 
on the Treasury Bench to rise in his place and say : 
"You never could have supposed that a Liberal Ad- 
ministration intended to pass such a bill as this ; the 
exact nature of the proposal had entirely escaped our 
notice ; in the pressure of public business we accepted 
the bill from the Enclosure Commissioners without 
adequate mquiry ; we thank you for having pointed 
out to us the injustice which we were about uninten- 
tionally to commit, and we will at once withdraw the 
bill." Never were expectations doomed to more en- 
tire disappointment. I was evidently too inexperienced 
to estimate the full extent of the change which may 
come over men when bidding for popular support on 
the hustings, and when ensconced as officials in Downing 
Street. What took place when the third reading of 
the bill was objected to, is probably still in the recol- 
lection of the House. The late Under Secretary for 
the Home Department (Mr Knatchbull-Hugessen) at 
once rose, and scolded me for presuming to interfere 
with the passing of a Government measure: But as 
the bill had never been properly discussed, it had been 
hurried through its various stages in those small hours 
of the morning when so many things are done which 
will not bear the light of day, the House, happily, 
prevented the bill passing, and the Government was 
at length compelled to consent to the adjournment 



THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 227 

of the debate, and, ultimately, to refer the bill to a 
Select Committee. Although the contest thus ended 
in what may be regarded as a drawn battle, yet it 
was by no means barren of results. The attention of 
the public had been sufficiently aroused to the im- 
portance of the question, so that the Government has 
been compelled to recognise the necessity of doing 
something in the matter. They accordingly intro- 
duced the bill which is now before the House for 
amending the Enclosure Act of 1845. Before I pro- 
ceed to consider the provisions of this bill, I should 
like to make a few remarks on some of the conse- 
quences which have been produced by the enclosure 
of land. No one who has taken any trouble to in- 
vestigate the subject can, I think, fail to arrive at 
the conclusion that the present unsatisfactory state 
of the agricultural labourers is in a great measure due 
to the manner in which the enclosure of land has been 
permitted to take place. Mr Kebbell, in a recent work 
on the agricultural labourer, has come to the con- 
clusion that in the middle of the last century the rural 
labourer was better able to command the necessities 
of life than he now is ; and this opinion is corroborated 
by almost every writer on political economy. As one 
of these writers remarks, labourers who once possessed 
proprietary rights in the soil are now deprived of them, 
and a class once independent has been gradually re- 
duced to the position of dependent hirelings. It is 
of no use to repeat platitudes about agricultural pros- 
perity, better cultivated land, increasing wealth, rising 
rents, and farms more sought after than ever, when, as 
a background to this glowing picture, we have a class 

15—2 



228 THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 

of labourers eking out a miserable existence on nine 
or ten shillings a week, sometimes living in houses 
which do not deserve the name of human habitations, 
their children in a state of ignorance which could 
not be greater if England had lost her Christian- 
ity and civilization, passing day after day uncheered 
by hope, with no other prospect before thern than 
that, when they are no longer able to work, they will 
have to become supplicant mendicants for the pauper's 
dole. If wages have risen 15 per cent, in the rural 
districts during the last quarter of a century, the cost 
of articles of food consumed by the rural poor has 
increased 30 per cent, and increased facilities of com- 
munication have so equalized the price of food that 
living is now little cheaper in the rural districts than 
in the metropolis. Agricultural labourers now have 
great difficulty in obtaining milk ; and the state of 
things I describe has been powerfully promoted by the 
enclosure of land ; for formerly, close to almost every 
village, there was a common on which the labourer 
could keep a cow, poultry, or a pig. Referring now to 
the proposal before the House to amend the Existing 
Enclosure Act, I would gladly support it if I thought 
it would remedy the present state of things. The chief 
reason which induces me to think that it would not do 
so, is that everything would be left in the future, as it 
has been in the past, to the Enclosure Commissioners, 
whose conduct cannot be sufficiently condemned, as 
I believe hon. members will admit if they will listen to 
the few following facts. Wisley Common, in the, 
neighbourhood of Weybridge, was one of the Com- 
mons proposed to be enclosed by the bill of 1869, to 



THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 229 

"which. I have already referred. The common consists 
of 380 acres, and out of this entire area the Enclosure 
Commissioners only proposed to reserve two acres as 
a recreation ground for the public, and nothing as 
allotment gardens for the poor. It is not surprising 
that the House considered this proposal to be of so 
extraordinary a character, that it was deemed expe- 
dient to appoint a Select Committee to investigate this 
particular proposal. After listening to what the Com- 
missioners had to say in justification of their conduct, 
and after receiving evidence from the neighbourhood, 
the committee decided that, if the Common was en- 
closed at all, the public recreation ground should be 
increased by 300 per cent. ; and the poor, instead 
of having nothing for allotment gardens, as the Com- 
missioners proposed, ought to have the utmost the 
act allows, namely, 1 acres. But bad as this case is, 
I will describe another, which will exhibit the conduct 
of the Commissioners in a still stronger light. In the 
same bill which proposed to enclose Wisley, and which, 
as we have seen, the Government exerted all their in- 
fluence to pass, it was also proposed to enclose Withey- 
pool Common, its area being no less than 1906 acres. 
Out of this extensive area the Enclosure Commis- 
sioners only reserved one miserable acre as a recrea- 
tion ground for the public, and did not even suggest 
that a single foot of the land should be set aside 
as allotment gardens for the poor. In order that the 
House should adequately appreciate the motives and 
sentiments which have prompted the conduct of the 
Commissioners, I earnestly ask hon. members carefully 
to consider the following narrative. The Commissioner 



230 THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 

to whom this particular enclosure was entrusted, on 
being asked by the Select Committee to give the 
reasons which had induced him to make such a paltry 
reservation for the public and the poor, made the 
following statement in justification of what he had 
done. In the first place, he asserted that a larger 
recreation ground would not be used; secondly, that 
the common was never resorted to by the inhabitants 
of the locality ; thirdly, that there were numerous 
commons close to the common in question ; and lastly, 
that it was impossible to allot more than one acre 
for a recreation ground, because the other portions 
of the common were too steep. Before accepting these 
statements, it was thought desirable that the opinion 
of the locality should, if possible, be ascertained. I 
accordingly suggested to the committee that the parish 
clerk and the parish schoolmaster would be suitable 
witnesses to summon. No member of the committee 
had, of course, the slightest idea of the evidence they 
were likely to give. What they did say, however, will 
well repay a careful perusal. In the most positive 
and emphatic terms they contradicted every statement 
which had been made by the Enclosure Commissioner. 
They asserted that a larger recreation ground would 
be greatly appreciated by the inhabitants. They gave 
the most explicit denial to the statement that the 
common was not largely resorted to by the people 
living in the locality. Instead of there being numerous 
other commons in the neighbourhood which could be 
used if this particular one were enclosed, they assured 
the committee that the nearest common was Hve miles 
distant, at the top of a very steep hill ; and to dis- 



THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 231 

prove the assertion that only one acre could be allotted 
as a recreation ground because the common was so 
steep, they produced maps from which it was shewn 
that immediately contiguous to this single acre there 
were eight acres in every respect equally well adapted 
for purposes of recreation. It cannot be necessary to 
say anything more in order to convince the House that 
it is impossible to feel any confidence that the Enclo- 
sure Commissioners will properly protect the interests 
of the public. It is sometimes urged in defence of 
these Commissioners that, previous to any enclosure, 
they hold a local inquiry, and that if any wrong is 
going to be done to the poor, that is the time when 
complaints ought to be made. It has, however, come 
out in evidence that these Commissioners, apparently 
influenced by a strange perversity, almost invariably 
hold these inquiries at half-past one o'clock in the day, 
the very time when the poor are at work in the 
fields and cannot possibly attend. No trouble is 
ever taken to make them understand that they have 
a right to make a complaint ; they naturally think 
that resistance is useless ; they hear that some one 
is coming down from London to take away their com- 
mon from them ; and they suppose they might as 
well try to stop a running stream as try to resist 
the united efforts of Government officials, the lord of 
the manor, and other great men in the district. But 
it will perhaps be said, that the amending bill which 
we are now asked to pass will introduce a better 
state of things, for it proposes, in the case of every 
future enclosure, to reserve one-tenth of the ground 
enclosed for a recreation ground and allotment gardens, 



232 THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS: 

But although this would undoubtedly be an improve- 
ment on the old system, yet it will not work so well 
as many may be inclined to suppose. This can be 
easily shewn by an example. In an Enclosure Bill 
which was last year before Parliament it was proposed 
to enclose a common of seventy acres, in the heart of 
a densely populated district in the Potteries. This 
Common possesses great natural beauty, and is con- 
sequently largely resorted to. Suppose the common 
were enclosed, and one-tenth of it were reserved ; 
would a recreation ground of 3^ acres and allotment 
gardens of the same extent be the smallest compensa- 
tion to the tens of thousands who live in the neigh- 
bourhood of this common who would for ever lose the 
advantage of wandering over the whole seventy acres ? 
It has been sufficiently difficult in the past to resist 
proposals to enclose commons, but if this amending 
bill were passed, all resistance in future would be- 
come hopeless, and enclosures would go on with far 
greater rapidity than ever. For this is what would 
inevitably take place. Proposals would be brought 
forward in Parliament to enclose various commons. 
We all know that landowners, and those who aspire 
to be landowners, are supreme in this House. There 
would consequently be a great preponderance of feel- 
ing in favour of the enclosures ; and members would 
be able to say : " We cannot be doing wrong in voting 
for the enclosure, because Parliament has given sanc- 
tion to the principle that the interests of the public 
and the poor are properly secured, if a reservation 
of one-tenth is made in their favour." It cannot be 
too carefully borne in mind that the circumstances of 



THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 233 

the country have entirely changed since the com- 
mencement of this system of enclosures. The popu- 
lation of the country has enormously increased, and 
as the area of the common land has been at the same 
time greatly diminished, the commons which remain 
are each year becoming of greater value and import- 
ance to the public. The preamble of the Act of 1845 
asserts that it is desirable to facilitate the enclosure 
of lands. This may have been true at the time, but 
I believe the day has come when the policy of Par- 
liament in this matter should be fundamentally changed, 
and that we should now act upon the principle that 
it is desirable to retard the enclosure of land. The 
principles of political economy have been quoted to 
justify these enclosures. Probably there is no science 
the name of which is so often taken in vain. If 
something very bad is to be done, nothing is more 
commonly said than that political economy requires 
it. I have, however, no hesitation in asserting that 
after enclosure has reached a certain point, and this 
point, I believe, has long been attained in this country, 
political economy does not supply a single argument 
in favour of continuing the system of enclosures, but 
all its principles would shew that enclosure, if not 
stopped altogether, ought to be carried on with the 
utmost care and caution. All pasture produce in this 
country is gradually becoming dearer. The reason is 
this — we obtain corn from the most distant parts of 
the world, even from India, Australia, and California ; 
but for dairy produce and such perishable commodities 
we have to rely chiefly on our own soil. The conse- 
quence is that dairy produce inevitably becomes dearer 



234 THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 

with our progress in wealth and population. Much 
of the common land enclosed, and no inconsiderable 
portion of that which is left, constitutes some of the 
best pasture land in the kingdom, and is every year 
becomhig more valuable. It is no answer to say that 
some of this land is ill drained, and not properly 
attended to. That is no argument for its enclosure, 
but simply for its better management. Why not issue 
a commission, and treat all the commons in the country 
in the same way as those within the metropolitan 
area, and provide some means for their improvement by 
a rate ? If a common is not used for the purpose of 
recreation, the whole rate should be paid by the lord 
of the manor and the commoners who use the com- 
mon. If, on the other hand, the common is used for 
the purpose of recreation, then it is only fan that a 
considerable portion of the expense of maintaining it 
should be thrown on the neighbourhood. It is said 
that the enclosure of commons promotes the produc- 
tion of wealth and gives employment to the poor ; but 
the remarkable fact came out in evidence before the 
Select Committee recently appointed, that in many 
localities where the largest enclosures have been made 
the population has actually diminished since the en- 
closures have been effected. It is easy to understand 
the reason of this, for nothing can be more erroneous 
than to suppose that this desire to enclose land is 
solely promoted by a philanthropic wish to increase 
the productive resources of the country. In thou- 
sands of instances the commons enclosed do not 
produce a single blade of grass or a single ear of 
wheat more than when they were open spaces; 



THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 235 

the only difference between their enclosed and un- 
enclosed condition is, that now a privileged few can 
shoot tame pheasants, hares and rabbits over them, 
whereas before they could be enjoyed alike by the 
whole public. It is said that we may look more hope- 
fully to the future. But what ground is there for 
increased confidence ? We cannot at any rate look 
to the Government with any hope. I have already 
told the House how they attempted to force through 
an unjust Enclosure Bill in 1869. Last year another 
of these Enclosure Bills was before the House. Week 
after week the Government strained every effort to 
sneak the bill — if I may be allowed to use the expres- 
sion — through at two or three o'clock in the morning. 
It was only by resorting to repeated motions for 
adjournment that they were happily defeated ; if 
they had succeeded in passing this bill, much would 
have been done to destroy some of the most beautiful 
scenery in the country, and to prevent access to the 
Lizard Point and to Kynance Cove. 

Our course of proceeding when dealing with the 
enclosure of land ought to be fundamentally changed. 
Every Enclosure Bill should be referred to a Select 
Committee, and evidence should be taken from the 
locality with regard to each enclosure. If we adopted 
such a course, we should not be legislating in the 
dark, as we are constantly doing at present. In vain 
will Education Bills and Licensing Bills be passed, in 
vain will Museums be built and stuffed with specimens 
from floor to ceiling, if those whom they are intended 
to benefit are shut out from the invigorating influence 
of communion with nature. It is urged in defence of 



236 THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 

the legislation we are now asked to sanction, that 
urban commons would be placed in the same position 
as metropolitan commons were placed in by the 
measure of my right honourable friend the member 
for South Hants. (Mr Cowper Temple), and that they 
would consequently be secured against enclosure 
through the action of this House. But it seems to 
be forgotten that commons may be enclosed in two 
different ways — namely, by common law and by Par- 
liamentary intervention. So far as Parliamentary 
intervention is concerned, this bill would no doubt 
protect urban commons, but it does nothing to prevent 
commons being enclosed by common law ; and recent 
events have shewn that, so far as regards enclosure 
by common law, every common in the Kingdom is in 
imminent peril. In fact any common may be enclosed 
by the lord of the manor unless there happens to be 
some commoner sufficiently wealthy and public-spirited 
to incur the burden of a costly law suit. Berkhamp- 
stead and Plumstead commons would undoubtedly 
have been enclosed, had it not fortunately happened 
that these qualifications were possessed in an eminent 
degree by two of the commoners, Mr Augustus Smith 
and my honourable friend the member for Rochester 
(Mr Julian Goldsmid). It has been suggested by the 
present Under Secretary for the Home Department 
(Mr Winterbotham) that all the waste lands in the 
country should be surveyed. If there were such a sur- 
vey, we should then be in a better position to judge 
what commons should be absolutely secured against en- 
closure. In advocating such a policy, I should be very 
sorry if it were thought that I am in favour of unjustly 



THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 237 

interfering with the rights of property by depriving 
those of compensation who are fairly entitled to it. 
If a common is for ever to be secured against enclosure 
in order that the public may enjoy the use of it, it is 
only reasonable that the public should be prepared 
to grant whatever may be thought an adequate com- 
pensation to lords of manors, and to commoners. The 
common lands of this country not only afford oppor- 
tunities for the healthful recreation and enjoyment of 
the public, but they should be further regarded as 
reserves for promoting the future well-being of the 
country. Some of these waste lands may perhaps some 
day be used for trying some great social and economic 
scheme ; such, for instance, as co-operative agriculture. 
Feeling that nothing but good can result from further 
enquiry, I shall certainly vote in favour of the motion 
of my honourable friend the member for West Sussex 
(Col. Barttelot) to refer the bill to a Select Committee. 
On all questions relating to the enclosure of land the 
House is bound to act with the greatest care and 
caution. If an unfair tax is imposed, it may be soon 
removed. If an unjust law is passed, it -can be re- 
pealed. But if a common is improperly enclosed, the 
injury which is done is irreparable. The land will 
never, again be enjoyed by the public. The late Sir 
Robert Peel emphatically warned the House that there 
was no subject on which they were bound to act with 
greater circumspection. If these words of a great 
statesman had been taken more to heart, a vast amount 
of mischief which can never be repaired would have 
been prevented, and the public would not have been 
deprived, without chance of restoration, of privileges 



238 THE ENCLOSURE OF COMMONS. 

of priceless value. This is not a question of a day, 
nor of an hour, nor for to-morrow only, but for all 
time. Not the least valuable of the many things 
which we have inherited from our predecessors are 
portions of the country in which nature has not been 
spoilt by man ; and let us be careful that we are not 
less generous to those who will come after us ; for no 
amount of vaunted civilization, no accumulation of 
wealth, can justify us in the eyes of posterity if we 
leave this country shorn of much of the beauty with 
which it has been endowed by nature 1 . 

1 The bill was ultimately withdrawn, and a resolution was passed by 
the Select Committee, declaring that, pending legislation on the subject, 
it is inexpedient that any more commons should be enclosed. 



THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN 1 . 

May, 1872. 



In asking the House to consider the present position 
of the Law Officers of the Crown, I am anxious to 
assure honourable members that nothing is farther 
from my intention than to make anything like a per- 
sonal attack upon those who happen to hold these 
offices at the present time. My object is to point out 
the grave injury which is often done to the public 
by the fact that those who are the legal advisers of 
the Government, and who are primarily responsible 
for introducing measures of law reform into Parliament, 
not unfrequently have the greater portion of their time 
and energies absorbed by private practice. With re- 
gard to the present Law Officers I am quite ready to 
admit, that they have done nothing which may not 
have been done by their predecessors, and which will 
not improbably be done by their successors, unless 
Parliament intervenes to change the system. Although 
I shall chiefly confine these remarks to a consideration 

1 This speech was made in moving the following resolution : — That in the 
opinion of this House, it is desirable to adopt some new arrangements with 
regard to the Law Officers of the Crown, with the object of securing for the 
public the undivided attention of those who are primarily responsible for 
introducing measures of law reform and tendering legal advice to Her 
Majesty's Government. ; 



240 THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN. 

of the position of those who are the Law Officers of 
the Government in the House of Commons, yet it is 
important that we should stay for a moment to ask 
whether it is possible for any one, however gifted he 
may be, adequately to discharge the duties allotted 
to a Lord Chancellor. In the first place he presides 
over the House of Lords as the Speaker presides over 
this House. Secondly, he holdfi three important judi- 
cial offices. First: he is the chief judge when the 
House of Lords sits as an Appellate Court. Secondly : 
he is the leading Judge in Equity. Thirdly: he is a 
member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. 
In addition to all this he has to discharge many impor- 
tant administrative duties. Is it reasonable to suppose 
that a man thus burdened with work can find the 
requisite time properly to consider the various measures 
of law reform, and to master the details of various 
subjects involving difficult questions of international 
law, upon which he may at any moment be called upon 
by the Government to give an opinion, the result of 
which opinion may decide an issue of peace or war? 
But when we turn to the House of Commons, we find 
that the arrangements which are made in reference to 
the legal members of the Government are in a far more 
unsatisfactory position here than they are in the House 
of Lords. In the first place, the Lord-Chancellor is 
a member of the Cabinet. He can therefore exert a 
direct influence on the Government. On the other 
hand, the Attorney- and Solicitor- General, not being 
members of the Cabinet, are only able to exercise their 
influence on the Government in an indirect and un- 
certain way. They may have advice to give which 



THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN. 241 

never can be given, because it is never asked for. 
Again, the public has at least the satisfaction of 
knowing that the Lord-Chancellor can devote the 
whole of his time to his public duties. If, however, 
the Attorney- and Solicitor-General happen to be ac- 
complished lawyers or great orators, briefs come rapidly 
in upon them. By the etiquette of the profession — and 
this etiquette is quite as scrupulously observed as are 
the mandates of the sternest despot — the Attorney- or 
Solicitor-General, if retained in a case, at once takes 
precedence over all the other Counsel who may be 
engaged on the same side; and, consequently, upon 
him devolves the chief part of the labour and responsi- 
bility. It is scarcely necessary to remind the House, 
after what has recently occurred in the Tichborne case, 
that a barrister who is the leader in a great case must 
have his time so entirely occupied and his energies 
so fully absorbed, that he can scarcely have a single 
hour or the smallest portion of superfluous activity to 
spare for any public duty. It therefore follows that 
if the Law Officers happen to be eminent in their 
profession, the only time they can possibly have for 
the discharge of their onerous public duties is an oc- 
casional hour or two which may be left to them after 
their services have been actively competed for by rival 
suitors and attorneys. Fortunately, or as some may 
think unfortunately, for the country, both the present 
Law Officers occupy so prominent a position in their 
profession that they each enjoy a large and absorbing 
private practice. Without making a more particular 
reference to instances which must be fresh in the 
recollection of the House, honourable members will be 
f. s. 16 



242 THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN. 

easily able to recall to mind an Attorney-General who 
scarcely had any practice at all, and this learned gentle- 
man freely acknowledged that the multifarious public 
duties which he had to perform were more than suffi- 
cient to occupy the whole of his time. We are there- 
fore led to the conclusion that the time which an 
Attorney- or Solicitor- General devotes to private prac- 
tice is not only time taken away from the public, but 
may be regarded as a measure of the extent to which 
his official work must necessarily be neglected. And, 
when we consider what the Law Officers have to do, 
I am sure the House will arrive at the opinion that 
there are no members of the Government, who, by an 
adequate discharge of their duties, can render greater 
service to the country; and who, by neglecting them, 
may inflict a more serious injury upon the public. 
In the first place, the Law' Officers are primarily re- 
sponsible for introducing measures of Law reform 
into this House. There is no country in the world 
whose legal system is so complicated as ours, and 
where the process of obtaining justice is so dear and 
so slow. It is notorious that a civil suit often costs 
far more than the money in dispute. A man will 
frequently submit to a great deal of injustice rather 
than incur the cost of a lawsuit. Men of business 
often say it is far better to lose a few hundred 
pounds than to have a lawsuit dragging on for two 
or three years. As this feeling spreads through the 
country it is evident that a most serious encourage- 
ment is given to fraud, and an influence is brought 
into operation to introduce a lower tone of morality 
into commercial dealings. But if any proof were want- 



THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN. 243 

ing to convince the House of the urgent need there 
is of a thorough reform of our law, it is only necessary to 
refer to what the Attorney-General (Sir J. Coleridge) 
said on Wednesday last, when he told us that the 
laws relating to the property of married women were 
more worthy of a barbarous than of a civilized country. 
Again, it will be scarcely denied that our system of 
land-conveyancing is so complicated and expensive that 
if it were made simpler, cheaper, and more expeditious, 
such a reform — viewed simply in its economic aspects 
— would be a far greater gain to the country than 
a free breakfast- table or a remission of the income-tax. 
And, now, I will ask hon. members whether there is 
the smallest chance of passing any measure so great 
and comprehensive as a reform of our conveyancing 
system must be, if those who are responsible for the 
preparation of such a measure, and if those to whose 
charge it would be intrusted in this House, have 
nearly the whole of their time absorbed in other 
pursuits. We must all be ready to admit that the 
greatest legislative achievements of the present Par- 
liament have been the Irish Church and the Irish 
Land Acts, and can any one deny that the passing of 
these measures was in no small degree due to the 
mastery of details and the perfect knowledge of the 
questions possessed by the Prime Minister ? If, how- 
ever, he had been less completely master of all the 
details of these measures, we should probably have 
got into such inextricable confusion that they would 
either not have passed at all, or would have left this 
House in an almost unworkable form. But no At- 
torney- or Solicitor- General has ever been more dis- 

16—2 



244 THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN. 

tinguished for legal knowledge than is the Prime 
Minister for financial skill ; and I ask the House, if he 
permitted this financial skill to be competed for by 
rival mercantile companies, if he spent nine-tenths 
of his time engrossed in commercial pursuits in the 
city, could he by any possibility have prepared and 
mastered those great and difficult measures to which 
I have referred ? It would be thought absolutely 
intolerable for either the First Lord of the Treasury, 
the Secretary for War, the President of the Poor-Law 
Board, or the head of any other great department of 
the State, to give up nearly the whole of his time to 
private business ; why then should it be less intolera- 
ble for those who officially represent the department 
of Law in this House to devote nearly the whole of 
their energies to private practice ? But the subject 
can perhaps be presented in another and a still stronger 
light. The Law Officers have not simply to introduce 
measures of Law reform. They are also primarily 
responsible for giving legal advice both to the Govern- 
ment and to this House. There is scarcely a measure 
introduced into Parliament which does not involve 
some difficult legal questions, upon which the Govern- 
ment and this House may not require an authoritative 
legal opinion. Now, the Government may, at any 
moment, in a most critical juncture of public affairs, 
lose the services of their Law advisers, although these 
services may be of the most essential importance, not 
only to the Government but also to the country. The 
Prime Minister has frankly admitted that the Alabama 
Treaty was never even submitted to the Law Officers 
of the Crown. What was the reason of this ? I do 



THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN. 245 

not wish for one moment to blame the Prime Minis- 
ter. He no doubt was far too kindhearted and con- 
siderate for the feelings of others, to put so great 
a strain as the consideration of a treaty upon an 
Attorney- General whose days and nights were being 
given to the Tichborne case, and to a Solicitor-General 
who probably had at least a dozen leading Chancery 
suits under his special superintendence. But this 
is not all. When a Government measure is before the 
House, we constantly want, and cannot obtain, a legal 
interpretation of some clause from the Law Officers of 
the Government. We all know what has again and 
again happened this session in reference to the Ballot 
Bill. The House requiring a legal explanation of some 
clause or amendment, an appeal is made to the Soli- 
citor-General (Sir G. Jessel), but he evidently has no 
time to give to the consideration of the measure, and 
the only result of his rising is at once, as we all 
know, to make "confusion worse confounded." But 
it is not only with regard to Government measures 
that we have to make these complaints. Last week 
a bill was before the House introduced by my hon. 
and learned friend the member for Clare (Sir C. 
O'Loghlen). Such contradictory accounts were given 
as to the legal effect of this bill, that there was a very 
general feeling in the House that it was impossible to 
give a vote upon it, until we obtained an authoritative 
legal interpretation of some of its clauses. In this 
state of perplexity we naturally turned for assistance 
to the Law Officers of the Crown. Where were they \ 
I need scarcely say that they were not in this House. 
Sir George Jessel was, of course, at Lincoln's Inn, and 



246 THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN. 

Sir John Coleridge, at the very time he was wanted 
in this House, was performing the important work of 
arguing in the Queen's Bench in a case (Skinner v. 
Usher) which arose from a dispute about hiring a cab 
at a railway station. This latter incident serves as 
a singularly instructive comment on the present sys- 
tem. It might be supposed that a dispute about the 
hiring of a cab could be settled in a few moments ; but 
the case of Skinner v. Usher had already assumed the 
form of a long and costly suit, and, from some remarks 
which fell from the learned judge who presided, it 
appeared that the case depended upon the interpreta- 
tion of certain clauses in an Act of Parliament which 
had left this House in so obscure and unintelligible a 
form that it was almost impossible precisely to define 
its meaning. The dispute may therefore go on until 
it has been carried into every Court in the kingdom. 
But the most significant part of the affair is this, — 
that this very Act, the unintelhgibility of which per- 
plexes our most learned judges, was passed by the 
very Government of which Sir J. Coleridge was him- 
self one of the Law Officers. We therefore arrive at 
this result, and it is one which I would earnestly 
commend to the serious consideration of Parliament 
and the country : — that according to the present sys- 
tem it may happen that at the very time when the 
services of the Attorney-General are required in 
this House, he may be arguing in a case which 
could be settled without long and costly litigation, 
if he could give a little more time to measures when 
considered by this House, and thus prevent their 
passing in a form which renders it impossible for 



THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE GROWN. 247 

them to be understood by the public, or explained by 
the judges. What security have we that another Ala- 
bama case may not arise, if the Law Officers are so 
much absorbed in private practice that a Prime Mi- 
nister cannot bring himself to disturb them with any 
question involving considerations of public policy? 
But perhaps not the least serious evil of the present 
system arises from the circumstance that the Govern- 
ment may have to decide what part they shall take 
in some civil or criminal case. In determining the 
course of conduct which they shall pursue, they must 
be chiefly guided by the advice of their Law Officers J 
but of this advice they may be completely deprived 
because the Law Officers may be retained in the 
case by some private individuals who are interested 
in it. Two years ago the Government had to decide 
whether the interests of the public demanded that they 
should undertake the prosecution of the directors of 
the Overend, Gurney Company. I am not now going 
to question the conclusion which the Government 
then came to, but what I do wish to point out is, 
that the Government, in arriving at any conclusion 
at all, had of course to rely on the advice which 
might be tendered to them by the Attorney- and 
Solicitor-General. But it happened that the Solicitor- 
General was precluded from giving any advice to the 
Government at all, because he had been retained by 
some of the directors to defend them ; and, of course, 
the Attorney-General might also have been retained. 
But in striking contrast to what occurred in this par- 
ticular instance, I will ask the House to consider what 
has happened in another case, which during the last 



248 THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN. 

few months" has occupied much public attention. Sir 
J. Coleridge, who is now Attorney-General, was, as 
we all know, the leading counsel against the Claimant 
in the Tichborne case. Having one week been act- 
ing as counsel against him, he had next week to be- 
come the adviser of the Government in prosecuting 
him on a serious criminal charge, and also had to 
advise the Government to spend a very large sum 
of money in the prosecution. The consequences pro- 
duced in the country have been extremely mischievous. 
Depend upon it, when the Government has to come 
to this House and ask for the money for this prose- 
cution, they will find that a widespread feeling of 
discontent exists throughout the country in reference 
to the expenditure ; not because the money is grudged, 
but because, from the peculiar position occupied by 
the Attorney-General in the case, the public has got 
an idea that there has not been exactly fair play. 
No one, probably, will more regret the prevalence of 
such a feeling than the Attorney-General himself ; but, 
as when he was engaged in the case he found it 
necessary to brand the Claimant with every oppro- 
brious epithet the dictionary contains, commonplace 
people think it hardly satisfactory that he should 
afterwards advise a prosecution on behalf of the Go- 
vernment and the nation. 

Enough has probably been now said to shew the 
House how very unsatisfactorily the present system 
works ; even the excuse of economy cannot be urged 
in its favour. By a Treasury minute recently issued 
the Attorney-General is to receive £7,000 a year 
and the Solicitor-General £6,000 a year, simply as 



THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN. 249 

retaining fees 1 , for in addition they are to be paid 
for all contentious business in which they have to 
appear on behalf of the Government. It would re- 
quire a very lively imagination to suggest what sum 
they might not receive under the head of " contentious 
business." It is no palliation but rather an aggravation, 
of the present system to say, that these salaries are 
not paid out of the ordinary taxation of the country, 
but are obtained from patent fees, for these fees con- 
stitute one of the most obnoxious and objectional im- 
posts ever levied on ingenuity and industry. I ask the 
House to remember that the salaries thus to be paid 
to the Attorney and Solicitor-General are respectively 
40 and 20 per cent, more than the salary received by 
a Prime Minister or a Secretary of State. But this 
is not all. The Prime Minister and the Secretaries of 
State give their undivided attention to their public 
duties, whereas the country may only obtain from 
the Attorney- and Solicitor-General some chance hours 
that they are able to spare after their private practice 
has been attended to. If this Treasury Minute is not 
carefully scrutinized by this House, the electors by 
whose votes we were returned will very properly come 
to the conclusion, that all the fine things that were 
said on the hustings about economy were simply idle 
words. Although I do not desire to advocate a policy 
of niggardly parsimony, yet I have no doubt that 
eminent lawyers would devote their energies entirely 

1 This Treasury minute will not apply to the present Attorney- General, 
Sir J. Coleridge. He will continue to derive his official salary from patent 
and other fees. From a statement subsequently made by the Chancellor of 
the Exchequer (Mr Lowe) when defending this minute, it appears that the 
amount Sir J. Coleridge thus receives is not less than ,£12,000 a year. 



250 THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN. 

to the public service for smaller salaries than is usually 
supposed. The Legal member of Council, in India, 
receives £8,000 a year ; his whole time is devoted to 
his official work, and no one will deny that a man 
would usually far sooner receive £5,000 a year in this 
country than £8,000 a year in Calcutta. And yet 
some of the most eminent jurists have been willing 
to go to India as Legal members of Council. Among 
the many distinguished men who have held this posi- 
tion, it is sufficient to mention Lord Macaulay, Sir 
Henry Maine, and Mr Fitzjames Stephen. During the 
three years that Mr Stephen has held the office, he 
has done more for Law reform in India than we can 
hope to see done in this country in double the time ; 
and now I will ask the House, could he by any possi- 
bility have carried out these measures of reform if 
he had held a leading position at the Calcutta Bar 
and nearly the whole of his time had been occupied 
with private practice ? 

If I am asked what system ought to be substituted 
for the present one, without presuming to suggest a 
complete measure of reform, it certainly seems to me 
that there must be a general agreement as to the 
desirability of separating the political and judicial 
functions of the Lord-Chancellor. What is required 
in the House of Commons is a Minister of Justice who 
should be at the head of a department of law and 
justice, who should be primarily responsible for in- 
troducing measures of law reform, who should be the 
legal adviser of the Government, who should be always 
ready to give a legal opinion on questions arising in 
this House, and whose whole time should be devoted 



THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN. 251 

to the public. Such a Minister of Justice might receive 
£8,000 a year ; but even if it were necessary to pay 
him £10,000 a year, no public money would ever be 
more wisely and advantageously spent. The holder 
of this office would no doubt be one of the most emi- 
nent lawyers of the day, and it might be arranged, 
that, in the event of a change of Government, he should 
receive a pension as a Lord- Chancellor does now, and 
he might occupy a judicial position in a Supreme Court 
of Appeal. When it is necessary for the Government 
to be represented in Court, it would be easy to retain 
on their behalf the most eminent counsel, just as is 
now done by the Government of India, by the Bank 
of England, and by most great corporations. These 
counsel, who would be retained by the Government, 
might still be called Attorney- and Solicitor-General, 
but as their offices would be entirely non-political, it 
would not be necessary for them to have seats in this 
House or to vacate their offices on a change of Govern- 
ment. An important indirect advantage would result 
from this arrangement. The Government might then 
be always represented by the most eminent counsel 
at the Bar, whereas it now often happens that the 
Government is not represented in Court by those who 
are most distinguished in their profession, for the 
very simple reason that the greatest lawyers may be 
either unwilling or unable to enter Parliament. 

In conclusion, I will only say that I hope the sub- 
ject will soon be taken up by some one in this House 
far more competent to deal with it than myself; but, 
should this not be the case, the question is much too 
important to be permitted to drop, and I will promise 



252 THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN. 

to pursue it with persistency and perseverance. A 
great authority has said that the well-being of a com- 
munity is to be estimated by the extent to which 
justice is made cheap and expeditious. If this test 
of prosperity is applied to our own country, we must 
come to the conclusion that she is not to be congratu- 
lated on her present condition. 



SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

February, 1873. 

If in the remarks I am about to make but very slight 
allusion is made to the past, you will not, I trust, 
suppose that I adopt this course in order to avoid the 
responsibility of any vote that I have given, or of any 
words that I have spoken. But the past session has, 
during the last few months, been so frequently re- 
viewed; what was badly done has been so often criti- 
cized by the Opposition ; what was well done has been 
so constantly praised, not only by the friends of the 
Government, but by the Government themselves; that 
I shall not weary you by attempting my poor contri- 
bution to this great aggregation of repetition and re- 
iteration. In the future there is almost an incalculable 
number of questions which may worthily engage our 
anxious consideration. In proceeding to discuss some 
of these, we have, I think, a right to complain that we 
receive so minute a modicum of assistance from the 
responsible Ministers of the Crown. Ever since the 
beginning of September, scarcely a week has elapsed 
without the delivery of two or three speeches from 
various members of the Government. These speeches 
may be searched in vain for the slightest glimmer of 
light shed upon the legislation which impends over 



254 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

us in the future. Would it not be far better that 
those whom we are bound to look up to as statesmen, 
instead of repeating for the thousandth time that the 
Ballot has been passed, and purchase in the army 
abolished, should tell us upon what principles the im- 
portant measures which we are promised next session 
will be based ? It will no doubt be said such a course 
could not be adopted without divulging Cabinet secrets. 
But what occasion is there for all this secrecy and 
mystery ? If, for instance, the Cabinet has come to 
any decision in reference to local taxation, would it 
not be better for the Government — it certainly would 
be better for the nation — that the general outlines of 
the proposed measure should be known ? It would 
then be fully considered by those who have most prac- 
tical knowledge of the subject. Constituencies would 
be able to confer with their members upon it, and the 
Government would no doubt obtain from this discussion 
many valuable suggestions. But as matters are now 
managed, everything seems arranged, not to secure the 
best legislation, but to give a minister who introduces 
a new measure an opportunity of making a great the- 
atrical display. On Thursday next it will probably 
be announced that on the following Monday the pro- 
mised bill on Local Taxation will be introduced. As 
the expected day approaches, gossip will invent count- 
less rumours. A kind of meretricious excitement is 
aroused, and the House will be crowded on the occasion. 
The Government may very probably bring forward 
some proposals which no one may have anticipated, 
and which, consequently, may never have been dis- 
cussed. The country is taken by surprise, and the 



SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 25 5 

day for the second reading arrives before the bill has 
been properly and calmly considered. Moreover the 
whole discussion is at once thrown into the vortex of 
party politics. Some proposal is made, of which, per- 
haps, hardly fifty members really approve; but they 
get over their objections on hearing from the "Whip" 
that the Ministry will consider it a vital point, 
and, if it is rejected, will abandon the bill. In this 
way it not unfrequently happens that some principle 
is sanctioned, fraught with the most mischievous con- 
sequences in the future. In proof of this, innumer- 
able examples might be quoted. It will, however, be 
sufficient to refer to the prodigal waste of millions of 
national property, when at the time of the disestablish- 
ment of the Irish Church, the reversion of the Tithe 
rent-charge was handed over gratuitously to Irish 
landowners. Again, it can scarcely be doubted that 
the Irish Land Bill would have diffused a happier in- 
fluence if the wild expectations, which were doomed to 
inevitable disappointment, had not been permitted to 
grow up unchecked during the many months which 
elapsed between the time when the measure was pro- 
mised and the time when a knowledge of its provisions 
could be obtained. As a last example, it can scarcely 
be denied that much of the unfortunate agitation which 
has been created by the Elementary Education Act is 
due to the circumstance, that people have been made 
far more angry than they otherwise would be, because, 
while the Act was hurried through the House, there 
was scarcely time to judge what would be the conse- 
quences of many of its provisions. It is by common 
consent assumed that the two chief Government mea- 



256 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

sures of the coming session will refer to local taxation 
and to Irish University Education. With regard to 
local taxation, I believe that no subject that has been 
brought before this Parliament will more severely test 
not only its administrative capacity, but also the 
courage of the Government. Rumour says that the 
measure has been specially taken up and will be 
brought forward by Mr Gladstone. I hope this report 
will prove to be true, for in financial capacity, and in 
the management of a complicated financial measure 
when passing through the House, there is no living 
politician, in my opinion, to be at all compared to him. 
Whatever shortcomings the measure may contain, will, 
I believe, so far as Mr Gladstone is concerned, not be 
due to any want of capacity, but either to an inability 
or to an unwillingness to resist some influences against 
which he will have to contend. Already the House 
of Commons, on the motion of Sir Massey Lopes, has 
declared that many charges now borne by the local 
rates ought to be transferred to the consolidated fund. 
In the majority were to be found a great number of 
Liberal members, who, I fear, on this question are 
likely to exercise a powerful influence on the Govern- 
ment. I think that few proposals which have ever 
been suggested would prove more mischievous, and 
ought, therefore, to be more strenuously resisted, than 
the proposition to transfer local charges to the con- 
solidated fund. In the first place, it would undermine 
that principle of local self-government, the loss of 
which would fatally weaken the feeling of self-reliance 
among the people. If funds were provided by the 
State instead of by local authorities, they would of 



SPEECH A T BRIGHTON. 257 

course have to be administered by State officials, and 
the whole country would be enveloped in a great net- 
work of officialism. National energy, thus trammelled, 
would inevitably decline. But the proposal involves 
a still more serious objection. It is a maxim, as old 
as the hills, that public money is looked upon as no 
one's money. There would be a scramble for these 
grants from the consolidated fund, and localities would 
vie with each other in seeing how much of the money 
of the State they could spend. If the local authorities 
in this or any other town waste, for instance, £20,000, 
the indignation of the ratepayers is at once aroused, 
for they know that the money which is wasted comes 
directly out of their own pockets. But suppose a grant 
from the consolidated fund of a much larger amount 
were squandered in some useless work. A very differ- 
ent feeling would be excited; it perhaps would be 
thought that the money, though wasted, would be 
good for the trade of the place. It would not be 
taken directly out of the ratepayers' pockets, but it 
would be drawn from those coffers of the State which 
many seem to regard as a reservoir which can never 
be exhausted, and which never needs replenishing. 
No plan that could be devised would more effectually 
encourage extravagance. Do not be for one moment 
deluded with the idea that less money would be taken 
out of your pockets. Every million transferred from 
the rates would necessitate the taking considerably 
more than a million from the consolidated fund, and 
thus the aggregate amount extracted from the com- 
munity by taxation would not be diminished but in- 
creased. But the strangest part of the whole affair 
f. s. 17 



258 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

is this, that those who advocate this transfer of local 
charges never explain how the extra money that will 
be required by the State is to be obtained. They do 
not even seem at all to recognize the fact that more 
money will be required, for it may be frequently observed 
that, side by side with this proposal, it is calmly sug- 
gested that there should be a "free breakfast table," 
or that the duty on malt should be abolished, or that 
the income-tax should be totally and unconditionally 
repealed. How very much trouble might be saved 
if we were all of us more careful to remember that 
the State cannot, any more than individuals, obtain 
money as if it were rained down from heaven — a 
spontaneous product of nature. Do not suppose that 
I think nothing is required to be done in reference to 
local taxation. There is much injustice which urgently 
needs redress, and there are many most important 
reforms which ought to be carried out. But the more 
attention I give to the subject, the more convinced I 
become that the injustice which most needs to be 
remedied is to be looked for in a very different quarter 
from that which has been pointed out by those repre- 
sentatives of the landowning classes who have most 
prominently agitated the question. It is, of course, 
impossible on the present occasion to do anything more 
than give a bare summary of conclusions ; but, as the 
discussion proceeds, I believe it will be generally recog- 
nized that local taxation is not so much a landowner's 
question as it is a house-occupier's question. Far from 
landowners being unfairly treated, they enjoy many 
exemptions which are quite indefensible. In the first 
place, country mansions are subjected to a much 



SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 259 

lower assessment than they ought to be. They are, 
in fact, assessed according to an altogether imaginary 
standard as to what their letting value would be; 
whereas the essential principle of a rate or tax on a 
house is that it should be a tax on expenditure rather 
than on property. Again, pleasure-grounds and plan- 
tations do not contribute their proper share to local 
taxation. Woods and game-preserves almost entirely 
escape assessment. Nothing can be more unjust than 
this. Again the landowners' interests in mines ought 
undoubtedly to be rated. It is, however, in towns 
that there is perhaps the most injustice associated 
with the present method of levying local taxation. 
Nearly the entire burden of the rates falls upon the 
occupiers of houses, and I have never heard a valid 
reason alleged why ground rents should not be rated. 
One example will shew the singular unfairness of the 
present system. Some of you probably know from 
painful experience, that if some improvement is 
carried out which permanently increases the value of 
house property, it is paid for entirely by the oc- 
cupiers of houses ; the owners get the improvement 
for nothing. Thus, suppose some great drainage works 
are to be constructed which will cost £500,000. The 
money is borrowed on the principle that by paying 
a high rate of interest, say 7 per cent., it shall be paid 
off in 21 years. The occupier of a house who has 
a lease for 21 years finds that a large addition is sud- 
denly made to his rates. He pays the additional rate 
during the whole period of the lease, and at the expira- 
tion of the lease, the owner of the house raises the rent 
because the value has been increased by the superior 

17—2 



260 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

drainage to which he has not contributed a shilling. 
Another anomaly of the present system is that county 
magistrates impose rates. We shall some day wonder 
how it came to pass that a non- elective body has been 
so long permitted to impose taxation on the people. 
There are many other things that I should like to say 
to you on the subject of local taxation, but it is tune 
that I should pass on to the next important measure 
which has been promised to us by the Government. 
I have already expressed an opinion that we are bound 
to feel no little satisfaction that the question of local 
taxation is, as we hear, to be taken up by Mr Glad- 
stone. I wish we could look with the same confidence 
to his treatment of the Irish University question. The 
reason why I have so little misgiving with regard to 
the one subject, and so much misgiving with regard 
to the other, is that the more Mr Gladstone's political 
career is studied, the more evident does it appear that 
whilst on the path of financial reform he will go as far 
as he is permitted, he will, on the path of religious 
equality, only go as far as he is forced. Nothing 
appears so inexplicable and so inconsistent with the 
avowed principles of the Government as their conduct 
in reference to Irish University education. They have 
resorted to so many artifices to avoid a distinct and 
intelligible declaration of their policy, that we might 
almost be led to assume that they have been under the 
spell of some sinister Ultramontane influence. For 
five years everything has been done that the forms 
of the House would permit to introduce the principle 
of religious equality into Irish University education 
by the abolition of every vestige of religious tests and 



SPEECH AT BRIGHTON, 261 

disabilities. You all know what power a Government 
has to throw impediments in the way of an independ- 
ent member. Twice they have managed to obtain a 
not very creditable victory by resorting to the threat 
of a resignation. If the repetition of such a manoeuvre 
is not checked, it will be disastrous to the independ- 
ence of Parliament. At length, however, the time has 
happily arrived when, I believe, the good sense of the 
House of Commons will insist that there shall be no 
more of this shifting and this shirking. The Govern- 
ment will be forced to introduce a measure of their 
own, but in case legislation may be again deferred on 
a subject which so urgently needs settlement, I have 
quite decided on the first day of the session to re- 
introduce the bill, the second reading of which was last 
year carried by a majority of four to one. If it should 
be found that the scheme of the Government is a more 
satisfactory solution of the question than the bill of 
which I have had charge, no one will be more rejoiced 
than I shall be, and I shall, of course, at once with- 
draw my own bill. If, however, it should be found 
that their scheme contains, under an ingenious dis- 
guise, the vicious principle of concurrent endowment; 
if it should be found that they propose to dismember 
and disendow Trinity College, Dublin — an ancient and 
illustrious institution, where the highest culture has 
always found encouragement; if, further, it is proposed 
out of the funds of this College, when it has been 
despoiled, to create not a teaching University, but an 
examining Board, into which the principle of religious 
nomination is to be introduced ; then, indeed, may it 
be earnestly hoped that the House of Commons will 



262 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

not be coerced, either by a threat of resignation or 
dissolution, to sanction a policy which will not only 
impede intellectual advancement, but will cause Ireland 
in the future to be still more injured than she has 
been in the past by the blighting influence of sectarian 
rancour. Although the two subjects to which I have 
referred may probably have the first claim on the 
consideration of the Government, yet there are other 
questions which we may reasonably hope will engage 
their attention. The English Education Act being one 
of those compromises which, intended to please every 
one, generally end by pleasing scarcely anyone, urgently 
requires amendment. First and foremost it is neces- 
sary that the provisions for securing the attendance of 
children at school should be amended. These provi- 
sions are so imperfect that the Act, so far as it has 
produced any effect in getting children to school in the 
rural districts, is a lamentable failure. It is also of the 
utmost importance that the 25th clause should be 
repealed — a clause which has done so much to fritter 
away the educational zeal of the country in barren 
sectarian squabbles. In saying this I am bound to 
confess that we who hold those views on education, 
which are supposed to be represented by the Birming- 
ham League, are not altogether free from blame in the 
matter. Instead of distinctly stating that we were in 
favour of a complete separation of religious and se- 
cular teaching, we gave a kind of tacit consent to 
the most indefensible of all proposals, viz. that the 
Bible should be read without note or comment. The 
scene that was lately enacted in the presence of the 
Birmingham School Board throws an instructive light 



SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 263 

upon the consequences which result from introducing 
sectarianism into rate-supported schools. The Board 
had advertised for a certain number of masters, and 
many applicants accordingly presented themselves. It 
might have been thought that the chief object of the 
Board would have been to ascertain whether the 
applicants would be likely to be efficient teachers ; but 
instead of this, various members of the Board, repre- 
senting different religious denominations, subjected the 
applicants to a severe cross-examination as to their 
religious opinions. One unfortunate candidate was 
worried into giving two or three contradictory defini- 
tions of verbal inspiration. Another, on saying that he 
believed in the Atonement, was asked to which of the 
twenty-five doctrines of the Atonement that have been 
promulgated did he refer. Another, on speaking 
dubiously upon some point of doctrine, was informed 
that a Catholic priest would watch him ; much in the 
same way, I presume, as a cat watches a mouse. All 
this badinage and chaff, of course, excited roars of 
laughter. Is it possible to have a more instructive 
comment upon the religious influence likely to be 
exerted by the Education Act, if it is permitted to 
remain in its present form ? Beference has already 
been made to the fact that recent legislation has done 
little or nothing to improve the education of the rural 
districts. As it was with the towns, so, I believe,, 
will it be with the country districts. Until household 
suffrage gave the town artisan a vote, there seemed 
to be little chance of any legislation to secure the 
education of the town population. Just in the same 
way, it seems too certain that, until household suffrage 



264 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

is extended to the counties, there will be no earnest 
and effectual attempt made to secure the education 
of our rural labourers. One remark in reference to 
this subject I think I am bound to make 1 . If house- 
hold suffrage is extended to the counties, there cer- 
tainly appears not the slightest reason why the 40s. 
freehold qualification should be retained for non-resi- 
dents. The abolition of the freehold qualification, so 
far as non-residents are concerned, would get rid of 
one of the greatest abuses of our electoral system, 
viz. : the non-residential faggot votes. Nothing con- 
tributes so much to increase the cost of county elec- 
tions as these faggot voters. They are often brought 
from a great distance at the expense of the candidate, 
they have often no interest in the county, and their 
qualification is frequently entirely fictitious. When 
the rural labourer has been enfranchised, the injustice 
of excluding women from the suffrage will, I think, 
come more forcibly home to us all. When it is re- 
membered that the extension of the suffrage to the 
rural labourers is advocated by members of the Govern- 
ment, and by moderate politicians of nearly all shades 
of opinion, and when we reflect that the Tories them- 
selves have not announced any antagonism to it, I 
think it must be admitted that every shadow of an 
excuse for maintaining the electoral disabilities of 
women is swept away. If the rural labourers in their 
present ignorance and dependence are fit to exercise 
electoral power, it cannot surely be urged that the 

1 In a speech I previously made at Brighton, I expressed the opinion 
that if household suffrage were extended to the counties, the measure 
should be accompanied with one for the redistribution of seats based on 
the principle of proportional or minority representation. 



SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 265 

women of England are not fit to be entrusted with 
a similar privilege. Mr Bright, an authority to whom 
we are all bound to pay the greatest respect, thinks 
that even if the present Parliament should last until 
the autumn of 1874, the question of household suffrage 
in the counties should not be dealt with till after a 
dissolution. It seems, however, difficult to suggest 
any valid reason for this delay. Mr Bright apparently 
thinks that the present Parliament, during the com- 
paratively short time it has to live, should concentrate 
a chief part of its energy in insisting upon a reduction 
of the National Expenditure. No one would more 
gladly lend a helping hand to this good work than 
myself. It is, however, well to remind you that no- 
thing is more common than enthusiastically to advo- 
cate the cause of economy, and at the same time to 
favour schemes which will inevitably lead to a great 
increase in national expenditure. How often does it 
happen that those who desire a reduction of expendi- 
ture, also desire free education, State-aided emigration, 
and the transfer of local charges to the consolidated 
fund. Well, if all these things can be done without 
adding to national expenditure, something more than 
the dreams of the alchymists of old will be realized, 
for we should have at length discovered how to make 
wealth out of nothing. Questions affecting reduction 
of expenditure a^e, of course, intimately connected 
with proposals for reducing or remitting taxation. 
The advocates of the repeal of various taxes not un- 
frequently commit the same kind of inconsistency 
which, as has been shewn, may be fairly laid to the 
charge of some of the professed friends of economy. 



266 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

Thus the landed interest one day demands the repeal 
of the malt duty, and the next day declares with 
still greater emphasis that the national expenditure 
should be increased by making the State bear the 
burden of many charges now paid for by local rates. 
There has lately been a certain amount of agitation 
in favour of the repeal of the income-tax, and many of 
the prominent leaders in the movement, instead of 
shewing how the requisite saving is to be effected, 
or how the money which the tax yields is to be other- 
wise provided, give their adherence to the proposal 
for a "Free Breakfast Table." As this agitation for 
the repeal of the income-tax is like]y to assume in- 
creased significance, I should like to say a few words 
to you about it. No one who has ever devoted the 
slightest attention to the subject can pretend to deny 
that there are many disadvantages, and that there is 
much inequality associated with the income-tax. But 
does not the same remark hold equally true with regard 
to almost every other tax ? It must moreover be remem- 
bered that it is one thing to endeavour to make the 
assessment of the income-tax more just, and to attempt 
to improve the method of its collection, and it is alto- 
gether another and a very different thing to propose 
its total and unconditional repeal. The existing mode 
of collecting the tax is unnecessarily worrying and 
vexatious. The present discontent with the tax is 
no doubt in no small degree due to Mr Lowe's un- 
fortunate fondness for fantastic financial tricks. With 
regard to making the assessment of the tax more just, 
it certainly seems that something should be done to 
place temporary and uncertain incomes on a different 



SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 267 

footing from those incomes which are derived from a 
certain and permanent source. A possessor of a per- 
manent income, derived from an investment in the 
Funds, no doubt has more to spend than one who 
has an income of the same amount derived from a 
business, a profession, or a salary. It has therefore 
been suggested, with a view to obtaining a kind of 
rough approximation to equality, that a fixed deduc- 
tion should be made from all temporary incomes before 
they are assessed. Thus if the deduction were one- 
third, an income of £600, derived from a business, 
salary, or profession, would pay the tax on only £400. 
I do not by any means wish positively to pledge myself 
to the opinion that no better way of securing greater 
equality in the assessment of this tax can be found. 
The subject is surrounded with difficulties, and I cannot 
help thinking it would have been much better if the 
members of Parliament and the shrewd City men, who 
gathered in such numbers the other day at the Guild- 
hall, had addressed themselves to the solution of these 
difficulties, and had not expended so much vague de- 
clamation in denouncing the tax. Some of the speakers 
at the meeting seemed to give their sanction to a 
simple excision of Schedule D. If this were done, 
incomes derived from business would contribute no- 
thing to the tax, and no one condescended to suggest 
in what other way those who were thus exempted from 
the income-tax should be made to contribute to the 
revenue. Never, probably, was a more unjust proposal 
propounded. The wealthy merchants, bankers, and 
stock-brokers are to escape scot-free, whereas the tax 
would continue to be levied with scrupulous exactness 



268 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

from the annuity of the poor widow, from the salary of 
the underpaid clerk, and from the stipend of the hard- 
worked clergyman, or Nonconformist minister. Not 
less unjust is the proposal to substitute for the income- 
tax a tax levied solely on property. Why should one 
who is obtaining £20,000 a year from a business or 
profession escape a tax which is imposed upon one 
who, after a great struggle, has managed to save 
sufficient property to provide a bare competency for 
himself and his family ? You should be careful to 
understand what is the true signification to be given 
to this demand for the total and unconditional repeal 
of the income-tax. It must mean one of two things : 
either the tax must be got rid of, even if other taxa- 
tion, such as the levying of new duties on commodities, 
is to be substituted for it; or if the expenditure is 
sufficiently reduced to enable the money which the tax 
yields to be dispensed with, then it is to be abolished 
before a single other tax is reduced or repealed. Two 
years ago I did not hesitate to protest against the 
Budget of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, because 
the income-tax was made to bear the entire burden 
of additional expenditure. I ventured to say then that 
the extra expenditure should be borne partly by direct 
and partly by indirect taxation. If, on the other hand, 
it is proposed, when expenditure is diminished, to 
devote the entire saving to the reduction of the income- 
tax, I shall not the less feel it my duty to assert that 
a reduction of direct and indirect taxation ought to 
go on simultaneously, and instead of devoting the 
entire surplus to diminishing the income-tax, a portion 
of it ought to be employed in lessening the duties on 



SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 269 

some commodities of general consumption. There are 
many reasons why, at the present time, it is peculiarly 
important to enforce the strictest economy in the 
expenditure of public money. In the first place, the 
rapid rise which is taking place in prices — the con- 
sequent augmentation in the cost of living, and the 
greater dearness of materials, must exert a powerful 
tendency in adding to the expenses of all Governments. 
Then, again, although we may most emphatically con- 
demn the policy of entering into a rivalry of armaments 
with the great military Powers of the continent, yet 
we cannot help feeling that some influence must be 
exercised upon our expenditure by their prodigal and 
increasing outlay in warlike preparations. But you 
may fairly ask, What is the best way of practically 
enforcing economy on our Government ? I have al- 
ready reminded you that it is not altogether the fault 
of the Government, but the blame must, at least, be 
largely shared by those who are never tired of demand- 
ing grants of money for all kinds of purposes from the 
Imperial Exchequer. Again, it cannot be doubted 
that Parliament might do far more than is done in 
promoting economy by carefully looking after the 
various Government departments, and insisting that 
we get money's value for money spent. Depend upon 
it this end will not be attained by occasional speeches 
about economy. What is needed is patient and almost 
unceasing labour. No efficient check can ever be im- 
posed upon an extravagant department, except by 
those who devote months, nay, even years, of patient 
investigation, to mastering all the details of expendi- 
ture. Any member of Parliament who, for instance, 



270 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

would undertake such a task, with regard to the Army 
and Navy estimates, would render a most signal ser- 
vice to his country. Opinions may differ as to the 
strength of the Army and Navy which we ought to 
maintain, but there cannot be two opinions upon the 
importance of insisting upon that' administrative effi- 
ciency which will give us the best army and the best 
fleet at the least possible outlay. In saying that, 
when we are considering the question of public ex- 
penditure, we cannot lose sight of the great military 
preparations that are being made by numerous coun- 
tries, do not suppose that I am for one moment ad- 
vocating a policy of active and meddlesome foreign 
intervention. Least of all should any encouragement 
be given to that policy which was in vogue a few years 
ago, when our Foreign Ministers were always proffering 
advice, with the distinct understanding that this was 
the only kind of assistance the English nation was, 
under any circumstances, prepared to give. But al- 
though we may deprecate this kind of official inter- 
ference, yet there certainly seems reason to regret that, 
as a nation, we are gradually taking less interest in 
foreign affairs, and appear more ready to assume a 
policy of selfish isolation, as if the highest mission 
of a great country was to extend trade and become 
rich. The conduct of individuals is, we all know, pro- 
bably much less influenced by law than it is by the 
public opinion of their neighbours. Just in the same 
way, although the meddlesome interference of a Minis- 
ter may be resented, yet we may fairly conclude that 
a nation would be less ready to blemish her reputation 
with wrong-doing, if she knew that her conduct would 



SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 271 

receive due condemnation from the public opinion of 
other countries. During the past year two acts have 
been done by Prussia and France respectively which 
ought, I venture to think, to have called forth stronger 
protests from the English people. Rarely has an act 
of greater harshness been committed than when Ger- 
many offered to the people of Alsace and Lorraine no 
alternative, but expatriation, or immediate military 
service in a foreign army. The French Government, 
apparently with the tacit consent of the French nation, 
is, week after week, committing acts of the most 
vindictive cruelty in the execution of the Communist 
prisoners at Satory. No nation can be more jealous 
of fame and of glory than the French. They seem 
ready to make any sacrifice to remove what they 
consider the disgrace of recent military disasters. 
Those who throughout the world appreciate mercy 
and justice, will think that if these executions are 
continued much longer, it is not the disgrace of Sedan, 
but that of Satory, which the French themselves will 
some day be most anxious to efface. There are 
very many other subjects on which I should, if time 
permitted, like to speak to you. You will probably 
expect me to say a few words upon those disputes 
between capital and labour which are now assuming 
such serious significance. Any one, however, who 
thinks at all about the subject will soon discover 
that these disputes have their origin in causes which 
are altogether beyond the power of Parliament to 
control. Until some arrangements are adopted with 
the view of linking capital and labour together by 
the bond of a common pecuniary interest, Acts of 



272 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

Parliament and Courts of Arbitration will be alike 
powerless to prevent strikes and locks-out. How is it 
likely that antagonism will cease whilst employers think 
that their first concern is to buy labour as cheaply 
as possible, and whilst the employed consider that 
they are, above all things, interested in selling their 
labour at the highest possible price ? The hostility 
between capital and labour, which is now causing so 
many disastrous consequences, and is producing such 
widespread misery, may be regarded as an indication 
that our industrial system is passing, by slow and 
painful steps, into another phase, which promises a 
brighter and a happier future. We shall at last be 
taught by bitter experience how essential it is to coun- 
teract the antagonism now prevailing between capital 
and labour, by giving workmen an opportunity of more 
directly participating in the profits of the industry in 
which they are engaged. It may, I believe, be as- 
serted as a fact beyond dispute, that the principle of 
co-partnership has never been fairly tried without 
radically improving the relations between employers 
and employed, and without powerfully promoting the 
interests of all the parties concerned. The admirable 
training provided by co-partnership may gradually 
fit the workmen for that highest form of industrial 
development in which they supply the capital which 
their industry needs. Let me, however, entreat you 
never to lose sight of the fact that these great things 
are to be achieved, not by Act of Parliament, but by 
the prudence and self-reliance of the workmen them- 
selves. All that Parliament should be asked to do 
is, as far as possible, to secure for each man and woman 



SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 273 

a "fair field and no favour/' and to guarantee as far 
as possible to all entire liberty of action. On the one 
hand, workmen should have the most complete freedom 
to combine, but, on the other hand, the law should 
give the most ample protection to any one who may 
be coerced to join a combination. You will probably 
wish to know what I think of the sentence lately 
passed upon the gas stokers, and what is my opinion 
of the law by which they were convicted. That the 
sentence was unduly severe is acknowledged not only 
by the general voice of public opinion, but by the 
Government, for the Home Secretary has just reduced 
the punishment by two-thirds. It is, however, to my 
mind, an eminently unsatisfactory thing that these 
men should have been punished, not for a breach of 
contract, but for an offence against the obsolete enact- 
ments known as the Conspiracy Laws. The harshness 
of the sentence even as it at present stands is the most 
apparent when it is contrasted with the punishment 
which is meted out to other offences. A ruffian about 
the same time, who knocked his wife down and 
kicked her all over the body, bit her twice on the 
arm, and finally tore a piece of flesh out of her neck, 
was sentenced by the Dudley magistrates to only 
one month's hard labour. Such inequality will excite 
amongst the people a feeling which no Government 
will find it prudent to attempt to withstand. All the 
existing laws which seek to regulate Trades' Union 
offences need fundamental revision. The Master and 
Servants Act is based on a principle essentially unjust, 
and there never was a more bungling and obscure 
F. s. 18 



274 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

piece of legislation than the Criminal Law Amend- 
ment Act. Although I shall to-morrow have an oppor- 
tunity of speaking to you on India, I cannot pass 
the subject entirely by on the present occasion. No 
greater misfortune, and no greater disgrace, could be- 
fall our country than if we alienate the Indian peo- 
ple from us by indifference and neglect. The House 
of Commons has undertaken to govern them; no 
representative assembly ever assumed a graver respon- 
sibility. It is sometimes asked, What can the British 
Parliament do for India ? Amongst a hundred other 
things, it can at least do this : it can see that In- 
dia is not sacrificed to the party exigencies of home 
politics ; it can see that charges are not unjustly 
thrown upon India which ought to be borne by Eng- 
land ; it can call those to account who waste her money 
by administrative incompetency; and last, not least, 
it can protect the finances of India against the de- 
mands of those who seem to think that she is spe- 
cially created to supply cheap cotton for Lancashire, 
and to afford an eligible investment for English capi- 
tal. A Secretary of State for India ought to feel 
that he is sufficiently supported by public opinion to 
be able to resist those who apparently consider that, 
however many millions they squander in some unpro- 
fitable work, they should, by being able to draw upon 
the resources of India, be secured a high rate of profit, 
and be guaranteed against all loss. It sometimes 
seems to be thought that the people of India are so 
backward and unenlightened, that they will neither 
detect injustice, nor appreciate efforts to promote their 



SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 275 

welfare. Never was there a more unfortunate delu- 
sion. Nothing that is done in this country respect- 
ing India escapes their keen and active intelligence. 
The smallest service rendered to them is not less 
sure to excite in them the liveliest feelings of grati- 
tude, than is any act of injustice certain to receive 
from them its proper condemnation. One fact alone 
is sufficient to shew what a lamentable want of ap- 
preciation there is of the magnitude of the trust we 
have assumed in taking upon ourselves to control the 
destinies of two hundred millions of people. I am not 
now going to refer to the continuous neglect with 
which successive Governments have treated the affairs 
of India in the House of Commons, but I will ask 
you for one moment to think what impression must 
be produced by the fact, that although during the 
recess Minister after Minister has spoken upon every 
conceivable topic, not one of them could condescend 
to devote one moment's consideration to India. The 
Under Secretary, who is the official representative of 
India in the House of Commons, not long since made 
a speech in which almost every nation on the face 
of the earth was reviewed; he sat as it were upon 
a lofty pedestal of cosmopolitan criticism, and India, 
as the leading Journal remarked, was alone conspi- 
cuous for her absence. Although I have unduly tres- 
passed on your patience, I will venture to ask you 
to permit me in conclusion to refer for a very few 
moments to a matter personal to myself. I would 
not, however, allude to it, did it not have some bear- 
ing upon a public question of no slight importance. 



276 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

When a Parliament is in the fifth year of its exist- 
ence, an early dissolution is, of course, a very pro- 
bable contingency. Without presuming to make any 
prediction, it cannot be doubted that a general elec- 
tion may very likely take place before we again meet 
at such a gathering as this. Nothing could be more 
unfair than to take a constituency by surprise, and 
you ought to have the fullest opportunity of being 
able to select the candidates whom you would best 
like to represent you. Do not suppose that I am 
about to announce my retirement : I will simply repeat 
what I have stated before, that I will never leave 
you until you tell me to go. But if you again de- 
sire that I should be your candidate, I wish, without 
the slightest reserve, to make known to you under 
what conditions I shall be willing to stand. Few 
things in politics at the present time are to be looked 
upon with such grave apprehensions as the increasing 
costliness of Parliamentary contests. Unless some de- 
cided stand is made against the present system of 
electoral expenditure, the evil is certain to grow with 
the growing wealth of the country, and soon it will 
happen that all but the very rich will be excluded 
from the House of Commons. There is no reason 
why I should hesitate to- speak to you with perfect 
openness. I am no more justified in spending £500 
or £600 at each recurring election than I should be 
in living in an expensive house, in keeping a carriage 
and horses, or indulging in any other luxury which 
I cannot afford. I have therefore determined, both 
upon public and private considerations, to confine my 



SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 277 

expenses at the next election within the narrowest 
possible limits. The necessary expenses the candidate 
is bound to pay by law. Besides these, it seems to 
me, that a candidate has done all that he can be 
fairly required to do, when he has advertised his 
address once in each of the local papers, and fully 
expressed his political opinions at a series of public 
meetings. All the usual electioneering paraphernalia, 
such as the printing of placards, the employment of 
paid canvassers, and the circulation of cards, involves 
an expenditure as useless as it is degrading. No- 
thing should I more regret than that the motives 
which have induced me thus to speak to you should 
be misunderstood. It may perhaps be thought that 
I am indirectly suggesting that my election expenses 
should not be borne by myself. I am, therefore, most 
anxious to state that even if subscriptions should be 
offered, I could not accept them. If election expenses 
are to be objected to on principle, little or no good 
is done if the system is allowed to continue in full 
vigour with the aid of other people's money. What 
I above all things desire to prove is that a Parlia- 
mentary career in this country is not an impossibility 
to one who is not rich. I promised that I would 
speak to you on this subject with complete frank- 
ness. After what you have heard, it is of course 
quite possible that you may prefer some one else to 
be your candidate. Should this be your decision, I 
shall accept it without a murmur, for whether I con- 
tinue to be your representative or not, I can never 
cease gratefully to remember your kindness, and the 



278 SPEECH AT BRIGHTON. 

most pleasing recollection of my political life will be 
that the more I have endeavoured to maintain a course 
of independence, and the more I have striven to ex- 
press to you my opinions without reserve, the more 
certain have I been to secure your confidence and 
retain your esteem. 



CAMBRIDGE \ PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 



WORKS 

BY 

HENEY FAWCETT, M.A., M.P. 

FELLOW OF TKINITY HALL; AND PKOFESSOK OF POLITICAL ECONOMY 
IN THE UNIVEBSITY OF CAMBBIDGE. 



THE ECONOMIC POSITION OF THE BRITISH LA- 
BOURER. Extra fcp. 8vo. 5s. 

This work formed a portion of a course of Lectures delivered by the author in 
the University of Cambridge, and he has deemed it advisable to retain 
many of the expositions of the elementary principles of Economic 
Science. In the Introductory Chapter the author points out the scope 
of the work and shows the vast importance of the subject in relation to 
the commercial prosperity and even the national existence of Britain. 
Then follow five chapters on "The Land Tenure of England," "Co-ope- 
ration," "The Causes which regulate Wages," "Trade Unions and 
Strikes," and "Emigration." The Examiner calls the work "a very 
scholarly exposition on some of the most essential questions of Political 
Economy;" and the Nonconformist says "it is written with charming 
freshness, ease, and lucidity." 

MANUAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY. Third and Cheaper 

Edition, with Two New Chapters. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d. 

In this treatise no important branch of the subject has been omitted, and 
the author believes that the principles which are therein explained will 
enable the reader to obtain a tolerably complete view of the whole 
science. Mr Fawcett has endeavoured to show how intimately Political 
Economy is connected with the practical questions of life. For the con- 
venience of the ordinary reader, and especially for those who may use the 
book to prepare themselves for examinations, he has prefixed a very de- 
tailed summary of Contents, which may be regarded as an analysis of the 
work. The new edition has been so carefully revised that there is 
scarcely a page in which some improvement has not been introduced. 
The Daily News says: "It forms one of the best introductions to the 
principles of the science, and to its practical applications in the problems 
of modern, and especially of English, government and society." "The 
book is written throughout," says the Examiner, "with admirable force, 
clearness, and brevity, every important part of the subject being duly 
considered." 



WOBKS BY PROFESSOR FAWCETT, M.P., continued. 
PAUPERISM: ITS CAUSES AND REMEDIES. Crown 

8vo. 5s. 6d. 

In its number for March 11th, 1871, the Spectator said: "We wish 
Professor Fawcett would devote a little more of his time and energy 
to the practical consideration of that monster problem of Pauperism, 
for the treatment of which his economic knowledge and popular sym- 
pathies so eminently fit him." The volume now published may be 
regarded as an answer to the above challenge. The seven chapters it 
comprises discuss the following subjects: — I. "Pauperism and the old 
Poor-Law." II. " The present Poor-Law System." III. " The Increase 
of Population." IV. "National Education; its Economic and Social 
Effects." V. " Co-partnership and Co-operation." VL " The English 
System of Land Tenure." VII. " The Inclosure of Commons." The 
Athenceum calls the work "a repertory of interesting and well-digested 
information." 

ESSAYS ON POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SUBJECTS. 

By Professor Eawcett, M.P., and Millicent Garrett Fawcett. 8vo. 
10s. 6d. 

This volume contains fourteen papers, some of which have appeared in 
various journals and periodicals ; others have not before been published. 
They are all on subjects of great importance and universal interest, and 
the names of the two authors are a sufficient guarantee that each topic 
is discussed with full knowledge, great ability, clearness, and earnestness. 
The following are some of the titles: — "Modern Socialism;" "Free 
Education in its Economic Aspects;" "Pauperism, Charity, and the 
Poor-Law;" "National Debt and National Prosperity;" ""What can 
be done for the Agricultural Labourers ? " "The Education of Women ; " 
" The Electoral Disabilities of Women ; " " The House of Lords." Each 
article is signed with the initials of its author. 



POLITICAL ECONOMY FOR BEGINNERS. WITH 

QUESTIONS. By Millicent Garrett Fawcett. Second Edition. 18mo. 
2s. 6d. 

In this little work are explained as briefly as possible the most important 
principles of Political Economy, in the hope that it will be useful to 
beginners, and perhaps be an assistance to those who are desirous of 
introducing the study of Political Economy to schools. In order to 
adapt the book especially for school use, questions have been added at 
the end of each chapter. The Daily News calls it " clear, compact, and 
comprehensive ; " and the Spectator says, " Mrs Fawcett's treatise is 
perfectly suited to its purpose.'" 



MACMILLAN AND CO. LONDON. 



1 



Wm 



m 







